Passenger on US no-fly list taken off plane diverted to Montreal

[NM]

From news.com.au:

A PASSENGER jet bound for Paris from Mexico City was diverted to land at Montreal late today (local time) so officials could remove a passenger whose name is on the US no-fly list.

 

[samh004]

So they diverted all the way across the middle of the US so they could remove someone who could potentially be a terrorist risk. Seems a little silly.

 

[UP4014]

So they diverted all the way across the middle of the US so they could remove someone who could potentially be a terrorist risk. Seems a little silly.

I'd be guessing they only worked out who was on board when they were half way across, got to Nebraska and told to go north and not head towards the US eastern seaboard.

 

[v8Statesman]

Why does the US have any say on a flight that doesn't originate or land on the US?



Sent from my iPod touch using AustFreqFly

 

[dajop]

Why does the US have any say on a flight that doesn't originate or land on the US?

Aaah, Mexico City - Paris, unless diverting via Venezuela or the like involves flying over US airspace at some point. Going a long way south is the only way around it (given Puerto Rico's position in the Carribean).

 

[UP4014]

Why does the US have any say on a flight that doesn't originate or land on the US?



Sent from my iPod touch using AustFreqFly

Would you agree Australia has no right to stop an aircraft flying in our air space? Say a North Korean Airlines flight or would you think it reasonable they supply a manifest of what and who is on board.

 

[v8Statesman]

Given our geographic location, I would say the are lost.


Sent from my iPod touch using AustFreqFly

 

[harvyk]

Given our geographic location, I would say the are lost.


Sent from my iPod touch using AustFreqFly

Or full of Kiwis...

It does seem a little strange that they would
a. not pick this problem up before hand.
and
b. allow the plane to continue flying over US airspace rather than redirecting the plane back to Mexico.

As there is now a person in Canada who needs to get back to Mexico or Paris, and no doubt the US isn't too happy to have them in their country. It does kinda mean the pax is screwed...

 

[MrHyde]

Since the pax has already crossed the US and is now in Montreal, he should be able to get on a plane to Paris without going over US airspace.

I wonder if travel insurance would cover his extra flight from Canada to France.