Comments on: What is Eurostar Security for? http://blog.firetree.net/2005/07/30/eurostar-security/ Sharing useful things with the world. Thu, 24 Jul 2008 09:37:29 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.2 By: Robert http://blog.firetree.net/2005/07/30/eurostar-security/#comment-5868 Robert Tue, 21 Nov 2006 12:55:12 +0000 http://blog.firetree.net/2005/07/30/eurostar-security/#comment-5868 <p>I think you will find that the main article is flawed. Who ever is complaining about security, clearly doesn't know the difference between a Customs Officer, an Imigration Officer and Station Security Guards. It will always be the Station security guards who check passengers before they board the trains. Immigration and Customs officials will only normally check inbound passengers comming to the UK in designated work areas. Security Guards are imployed by the station management and follow strict guidelines set out by the DFT (Department For Transport). Security Guards do not have the same powers as Immigration Officers i.e. They cannot refuse entry to the UK. They also do not have the powers that Customs Officers have i.e. Powers of arrest, Stop and search, examination of vehicles, bags, freight etc. Don't blame the agencies working at the frontier safe gaurding the United Kingdoms borders.</p> I think you will find that the main article is flawed. Who ever is complaining about security, clearly doesn’t know the difference between a Customs Officer, an Imigration Officer and Station Security Guards. It will always be the Station security guards who check passengers before they board the trains. Immigration and Customs officials will only normally check inbound passengers comming to the UK in designated work areas. Security Guards are imployed by the station management and follow strict guidelines set out by the DFT (Department For Transport). Security Guards do not have the same powers as Immigration Officers i.e. They cannot refuse entry to the UK. They also do not have the powers that Customs Officers have i.e. Powers of arrest, Stop and search, examination of vehicles, bags, freight etc. Don’t blame the agencies working at the frontier safe gaurding the United Kingdoms borders.

]]> By: alex http://blog.firetree.net/2005/07/30/eurostar-security/#comment-5510 alex Wed, 23 Aug 2006 17:50:51 +0000 http://blog.firetree.net/2005/07/30/eurostar-security/#comment-5510 <p><strong>Ann:</strong> You make a reasonable point about the Channel tunnel being a high profile target. However you've not accounted for the fact that <strong>cars</strong> and <strong>lorries</strong> are not subject to fingertip searches before they are allowed onto the trains. Why would a terrorist bother to try to sneak a bomb into his hand luggage, when it would be much easier for him to put a much more powerful device into his car and just <strong>drive aboard</strong>?</p> <p>So, I'm afraid you've not convinced me that Eurostar security is anything other than a ritual of deference to authority.</p> Ann: You make a reasonable point about the Channel tunnel being a high profile target. However you’ve not accounted for the fact that cars and lorries are not subject to fingertip searches before they are allowed onto the trains. Why would a terrorist bother to try to sneak a bomb into his hand luggage, when it would be much easier for him to put a much more powerful device into his car and just drive aboard?

So, I’m afraid you’ve not convinced me that Eurostar security is anything other than a ritual of deference to authority.

]]> By: Ann http://blog.firetree.net/2005/07/30/eurostar-security/#comment-5509 Ann Wed, 23 Aug 2006 17:08:16 +0000 http://blog.firetree.net/2005/07/30/eurostar-security/#comment-5509 <p>I realize that your blog posting was quite some time ago - but I would like to point out to you that the thing you do not take into consideration is that the Channel Tunnel is one of the greatest engineering accomplishments of our time - and certainly the act of terrorists destroying the channel tunnel would be a proverbial feather in their cap. So - when you get patted down at the Eurostar security check - you may wish to keep in mind that there is a purpose - a good purpose - to keep the channel tunnel as safe as possible....not just the passengers aboard the train, but the protection of the tunnel itself and the commerce it creates for the countries it links. A bombing inside the tunnel would be as much of a tragedy perhaps as the WTC towers in NYC - in terms of it's "bragging rights" for terrorists and for the destruction of commerce relating to it's existence. Would you have begrudged 3,000 Americans their lives if security could have saved them?</p> I realize that your blog posting was quite some time ago - but I would like to point out to you that the thing you do not take into consideration is that the Channel Tunnel is one of the greatest engineering accomplishments of our time - and certainly the act of terrorists destroying the channel tunnel would be a proverbial feather in their cap. So - when you get patted down at the Eurostar security check - you may wish to keep in mind that there is a purpose - a good purpose - to keep the channel tunnel as safe as possible….not just the passengers aboard the train, but the protection of the tunnel itself and the commerce it creates for the countries it links. A bombing inside the tunnel would be as much of a tragedy perhaps as the WTC towers in NYC - in terms of it’s “bragging rights” for terrorists and for the destruction of commerce relating to it’s existence. Would you have begrudged 3,000 Americans their lives if security could have saved them?

]]> By: alex http://blog.firetree.net/2005/07/30/eurostar-security/#comment-749 alex Tue, 24 Jan 2006 23:12:57 +0000 http://blog.firetree.net/2005/07/30/eurostar-security/#comment-749 <p><strong>Kevin:</strong> Would more security checks in London & Madrid have saved lives? In the end I don't think so. It would just have been different people who died, in a slightly different place.</p> <p>I live in London. I could talk to you about the many millions of people who use the tube every day. About the impossibility of checking everyone's bags... But I'm not going to talk about that, because even if it were possible, I don't want to live in that world.</p> <p>My wife was travelling that day. I was worried for her safety. But I would rather that she died, than that she be forced to live in a land where every tiny action is monitored and controlled. Would I feel the same way if she had actually been killed or maimed? I can't answer that, but I hope that I would be brave enough to do the right thing. <a href="http://cauldron.firetree.net/world/the-price-of-freedom/">Here's what she herself wrote on this subject.</a></p> Kevin: Would more security checks in London & Madrid have saved lives? In the end I don’t think so. It would just have been different people who died, in a slightly different place.

I live in London. I could talk to you about the many millions of people who use the tube every day. About the impossibility of checking everyone’s bags… But I’m not going to talk about that, because even if it were possible, I don’t want to live in that world.

My wife was travelling that day. I was worried for her safety. But I would rather that she died, than that she be forced to live in a land where every tiny action is monitored and controlled. Would I feel the same way if she had actually been killed or maimed? I can’t answer that, but I hope that I would be brave enough to do the right thing. Here’s what she herself wrote on this subject.

]]> By: Kevin O Sullivan http://blog.firetree.net/2005/07/30/eurostar-security/#comment-748 Kevin O Sullivan Tue, 24 Jan 2006 19:23:31 +0000 http://blog.firetree.net/2005/07/30/eurostar-security/#comment-748 <p>Perhaps if the London and Madrid trains had such security checks such as the ones mention above those people could possibly still be alive...</p> <p>Would you be so quick to criticise attempts to secure passengers if you had a loved one on one of those trains or in fact if you had been on it yourself?</p> Perhaps if the London and Madrid trains had such security checks such as the ones mention above those people could possibly still be alive…

Would you be so quick to criticise attempts to secure passengers if you had a loved one on one of those trains or in fact if you had been on it yourself?

]]> By: alex http://blog.firetree.net/2005/07/30/eurostar-security/#comment-170 alex Sun, 31 Jul 2005 21:34:29 +0000 http://blog.firetree.net/2005/07/30/eurostar-security/#comment-170 <p>The news today briefly mentioned that a suspected London bomber was able to leave the UK on a Eurostar train. Apparently there is going to be a 'tightening' of security as a result. Two points:</p> <ol> <li><p>This is an issue of immigration control, not security. The measures I rail against in this article are apparently aimed at preventing people from smuggling weapons aboard, they are nothing to do with filtering out 'undesirable' passengers.</p></li> <li><p>What? Passports are checked two or three times by different officials. Surely if somebody has been put on a watchlist, then they stand just as much chance of being noticed at Waterloo station as they would at Heathrow. Either this guy wasn't put on a watch list, or an immigration official failed to notice him. What does the method of transport have to do with it?</p></li> </ol> <p>Finally, this guy was arrested anyway. So how has the system failed? I thought the whole point of cross border security cooperation was to enable people like this to be tracked and apprehended wherever they go, so that we don't have to depend on unreliable border controls. That's what we were being told a few years ago anyway. Seems like it's working OK to me.</p> The news today briefly mentioned that a suspected London bomber was able to leave the UK on a Eurostar train. Apparently there is going to be a ‘tightening’ of security as a result. Two points:

  1. This is an issue of immigration control, not security. The measures I rail against in this article are apparently aimed at preventing people from smuggling weapons aboard, they are nothing to do with filtering out ‘undesirable’ passengers.

  2. What? Passports are checked two or three times by different officials. Surely if somebody has been put on a watchlist, then they stand just as much chance of being noticed at Waterloo station as they would at Heathrow. Either this guy wasn’t put on a watch list, or an immigration official failed to notice him. What does the method of transport have to do with it?

Finally, this guy was arrested anyway. So how has the system failed? I thought the whole point of cross border security cooperation was to enable people like this to be tracked and apprehended wherever they go, so that we don’t have to depend on unreliable border controls. That’s what we were being told a few years ago anyway. Seems like it’s working OK to me.

]]>