national

JAL screening passengers from nations subject to U.S. entry ban

58 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© (c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2017.

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

58 Comments
Login to comment

Wow...talk about fear mongering spreading quick. Damn....

-10 ( +7 / -17 )

JAL doing Trump's dirty racist work for him. If they had balls they would condemn Trump's policy and say they would only advise passengers and let US Customs do its own work.

3 ( +17 / -14 )

LOL! Trump told Abe to do it too... And he did!!! WTH?

-9 ( +7 / -16 )

Unfortunately, I suppose they have to do this, otherwise they'll be stuck with having to bring the passengers back to Japan if they are refused entry into the U.S. I fear there are going to be some heated arguments at airports in Japan between passengers and hapless airline check-in staff.

Too bad. Trump is doing more damage in record time than any other elected leader in recent memory. He's the most despised man on the planet right now - and that is something that he, his supporters and the Republican leadership should be ashamed of.

33 ( +39 / -6 )

In my hometown there is a problem as many can no longer flights to the USA, not carrier specific.

Similar problems all over europe, etc.

Will the USA pay compensation, etc highly doubt it

5 ( +11 / -6 )

This is already backfiring on Trump the nazi. Translators who supported the Americans in the Iraq war, British Olympic champions, Oscar-nominated film directors. Those who voted for Trump in the US election can now see the reality of their choice. What an abject embarrassment for the 'leaders of the free world.'

14 ( +20 / -6 )

I don't know why JAL is facing criticism for this. All airlines screen passengers before they are allowed on planes - looking at visas etc. If these people are not going to be let into the US, then JAL can't bring them there. JAL is not the only airline doing it.

26 ( +29 / -3 )

@Tigerstokyodome. I think the problem is JAL is worried they can be held liable for repatriation of the passenger if they get to the U.S. I also strongly dislike the way Trump is conducting this policy, however I think JAL is probably trying to protect themselves. Additionally international passenger screening was mandated by the DHS in 2007. I am wondering what they are doing differently.

https://www.tsa.gov/news/releases/2007/08/09/dhs-announces-predeparture-screening-international-passengers-and-first

Maybe JAL is thinking ahead of having responsibility for getting people back to the point of origin.

By the way I agree with the part of your last post where you identify some of the people excluded due to this policy that should not be, such as translators who supported the US, etc., etc. This was a poorly thought out and rushed out action by the President that may likely backfire on him.

6 ( +11 / -5 )

ALL airlines must do this at the check in counter and most airlines re-check everyone's passport prior to boarding as they pass the 'gate'. The reason for this is that MOST countries will levy a fine to the airline for allowing a passenger to arrive on their soil without proper authorization. This is not new, Air Canada, of all airlines, has be doing this for well over a decade and I'm pretty sure that Canada is not a Nazi state.

11 ( +11 / -0 )

None of the people being discussed were or will be prevented from entering the USA.

The translators who supported the US military were released within hours.

The Iranian director chose not to come, even if an exception was available, as he prefers to use his absence to politicize the issue. Im sure we will get to hear at least one Oscar speech about how he was banned, even though it was his choice not to come.

Mo Farah, it doesnt even apply to him to begin with: http://www.bbc.com/sport/athletics/38788910

-6 ( +4 / -10 )

Blacklabel.

You speak for thousands and more ftom across the Globe?

3 ( +4 / -1 )

The facts speak, not me. Each high profile person brought up by the liberals who is said to have been denied has either:

Been admitted after secondary screening, canceled the trip themselves as a form of protest or found out the policy does not apply to them (green card holders and dual nationals)

2 ( +6 / -4 )

High profile people are animals that are more equal than other animals of the same stripe.

"Animal Farm" is a good read as is Shardik, Watetship Down, etc. All are critical of governments

3 ( +4 / -1 )

The translators who supported the US military were released within hours.

Don't you mean 19 hours of detention:-

Shortly after noon on Saturday, Hameed Khalid Darweesh, an interpreter who worked for more than a decade on behalf of the United States government in Iraq, was released. After nearly 19 hours of detention, Mr. Darweesh began to cry as he spoke to reporters, putting his hands behind his back and miming handcuffs. “What I do for this country? They put the cuffs on,” Mr. Darweesh said. “You know how many soldiers I touch by this hand?”

Mo Farah, it doesnt even apply to him to begin with

Mo Farah was born in Somalia and has family there. Are you sure you read Trump's policy all the way through.

7 ( +9 / -2 )

Mr. Farah himself said he was relived the policy does not apply to him, did you not read the link I put?

Britain's four-time Olympic champion Sir Mo Farah says he is "relieved" he can return to his US home after it was clarified that President Donald Trump's travel ban did not apply to him.

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/queens/iraqi-man-free-detainment-jfk-airport-article-1.2958091

Mr. Darweesh said he is thankful to be in the USA, has no ill will towards Trump and shrugged off the inconvenience.

A second Iraqi man, Haider Sameer Abdulkhaleq Alshawi, 33, was released about 7 p.m. after spending several hours in detention.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

TigersTokyoDome: "JAL doing Trump's dirty racist work for him. If they had balls they would condemn Trump's policy and say they would only advise passengers and let US Customs do its own work."

But they don't have balls, nor have they ever. They kow-tow to any nation under the sun if it may affect trade and/or economics, then ask other nations not to look badly upon it. If you want to see a nation that actually stands up, see what Canada did about Trump's ban... and fortunately even powers that be in the US have effectively stopped the ban.

-15 ( +2 / -17 )

JAL is not the only airline doing it.

So two wrongs make a right?

-3 ( +3 / -6 )

So two wrongs make a right?

I don't think it's a wrong. JAL didn't set the policy of the US, they are just working within that policy. Same as all other airlines.

The policy is flawed, and as such, the creator of the policy is in the wrong for it.

Same as I wouldn't criticize a border guard in the US for denying someone from one of the countries. They have to deny the person, it's their job.

2 ( +6 / -4 )

I think JAL is looking out for the passengers, not doing Trump's dirty work. Who wants to be detained by the US? Really?

3 ( +3 / -0 )

I don't think it's a wrong. JAL didn't set the policy of the US, they are just working within that policy. Same as all other airlines.

So then why pick out JAL for notice here? What about ANA? How about other airline companies that fly in and out of Japan headed for the US?

There is no need to highlight something if it is already being done in practice. It's just spreading the fear around the world more.

Funny, the majority of 9/11 terrorists came from Saudi Arabia, but that country isn't on the list. THe terrorists from San Bernadino were from from Pakistan, they aren't on the list of countries either.....excuse me, it's selective fearmongering my bad.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

If you want to see a nation that actually stands up, see what Canada did about Trump's ban... and fortunately even powers that be in the US have effectively stopped the ban.

I don't call it brave at all, Canada can do whatever it wants as a sovereign nation and if the government thinks that letting in people that could pose a security risk and they are willing to take their chances on a hope and a prayer, that's their country, their rules, their prerogative. They do what they feel is right and we do the same, likewise, if Japan is in the same position and they feel it's the best thing for the nation, then so be it. I think Japan should be overly cautious as well as Europe and the US.

-1 ( +5 / -6 )

Donald is getting the attention of the world and while he is at it creates more enemies and increased threats to the United States. He could have started his presidency on a more positive note, like human rights issues, abolishing discrimination, global warming, environmental destruction, the gap between rich and poor. That would have worked 2-ways: for his popularity and support and for those benefiting from it. But this man does not operate this way. So sad.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

He could have started his presidency on a more positive note, like human rights issues, abolishing discrimination, global warming, environmental destruction, the gap between rich and poor.

You know he ran as a Republican right?

9 ( +9 / -0 )

TigersTokyoDome: JAL doing Trump's dirty racist work for him. If they had balls they would condemn Trump's policy and say they would only advise passengers and let US Customs do its own work.

Don't blame JAL here. They're actually doing something good. They're saving these people the expense of a wasted flight and a return to Japan. Best to get off the plane now with cash still in hand and try to sort things out. They've already been slapped in the face by a blanket ban that hurts more people that any possible good it could do. No point stealing cash from their back pocket at the same time.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

I disagree with a Muslim ban and a country based ban, but I think every foreign traveller entering the US (and my own country) should be required to check a box on their arrival card explicitly declaring that secular man-made laws of the state are superior to all religious law in all circumstances, that they believe men and women enjoy universal equal rights, that every person has a universal right to chose or leave their religion without negative consequences, that people have a universal right to choose their sexual orientation etc. These are the most basic principles of freedom and equality in our society, yet even moderate Muslims would struggle to agree to them on even the most liberal interpretation of the Quran. That should concern everyone.

The vast majority of immigrants are peace-loving people who share the values that have made western society such a desirable place go live in. It would be wonderful to say that all immigrants share these values, but unfortunately a small minority come to practice the same regressive values and ideologies that have made the societies they are fleeing from some of the most miserable societies in human history. We really owe it to our neighbours and all decent immigrants to keep these people out at all costs. It was disturbing to see the praying protesters at the Dallas airport baggage claim where men and women were segregated. Is that what America wants to encourage?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

bass4funk: "I don't call it brave at all"

Well, you call what Trump does "smart". At least you don't deny his acts of cowardice, even if you won't admit that standing up to them and saying what's wrong is wrong instead of trying to curry favour with Trump isn't brave.

I mean, just look at how badly Abe is trying to please Trump, as he also did with Putin, and many other leaders in the region. He knows he HAS to in part after how badly he's miffed China.

-10 ( +2 / -12 )

I don't call it brave at all, Canada can do whatever it wants as a sovereign nation and if the government thinks that letting in people that could pose a security risk and they are willing to take their chances on a hope and a prayer, that's their country, their rules, their prerogative.

So Bass, do you believe that Canada is a more dangerous country than the US now? I'm just curious...

0 ( +1 / -1 )

smithinjapan: I mean, just look at how badly Abe is trying to please Trump, as he also did with Putin, and many other leaders in the region.

Hmm... I'm not so sure about this, Smith... Abe hasn't tried to give Trump a Japanese dog yet... I fear he's not tying as hard to curry favour with Trump as he did with Putin. Can we read into this some underlying meaning for Japan's future foreign policy? (probably not!) :)

0 ( +1 / -1 )

I use ANA.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

But they don't have balls, nor have they ever. They kow-tow to any nation under the sun if it may affect trade and/or economics

Let us think for a second. JAL makes money by flying people all over the globe. If they violate the rules of any country that country can restrict or ban their flights access. If JAL lost access for flights to the US it would result in lots of their employees losing their jobs.

BUT JAL should take a stand (while other airlines take their business that won't come back if/wen things change) and it is just too bad for the innocent people that will be hurt.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

Let us think for a second. JAL makes money by flying people all over the globe. If they violate the rules of any country that country can restrict or ban their flights access. If JAL lost access for flights to the US it would result in lots of their employees losing their jobs.

JAL is only in business today because the Japanese government saved their butts. ANA flies people all over the globe and to me, better than JAL any given day of the week.

JAL staff act like they are koumuin, ANA, like customer service is their life and blood.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

I disagree with a Muslim ban and a country based ban, but I think every foreign traveller entering the US (and my own country) should be required to check a box on their arrival card explicitly declaring that secular man-made laws of the state are superior to all religious law in all circumstances, that they believe men and women enjoy universal equal rights, that every person has a universal right to chose or leave their religion without negative consequences, that people have a universal right to choose their sexual orientation etc.

If any country required this, Trump and US republicans would never be able to leave the country. Look at Pence and Ryan and what they are trying to do. US evangelicals are every bit as militant, backward, and self-righteous as radical Muslims.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Local news says it's both JAL and ANA.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

@lucabrasi Yeah I just learned that it's not just JAL but ANA is doint the same too.

WHAT A SHAME!

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

@jj

Cheer up. There`s always Starflyer. And down here we have Amakusa Airlines. You might persuade them to fly to the States, but you'll need a few refuels en route.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

If US immigration will not accept the passengers, JAL does not need to carry them.

The course of USA is not depending on others because it is USA.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

No. even if it is America's decision to not accept passengers because of their nationality, Japan is still a free country. passengers of Japan's airlines should bring them to wherever passengers want to go unless they do not violate Japan's security guidance. Japan should not be part of this discrimination based on nationality.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

Hail President Trump!

He's trying to do something to protect his own people unlike most leaders who place outsiders over their own people. He doesn't want the US to turn out like France, Germany and Sweden which have become Muslim hellholes where women are afraid to go out, even during the daytime, for fear or molestation and rape by the Muslim invaders, These countries are lost but hopefully we can prevent the US turning out the same way before it's too late.

I have to say I am enjoying seeing the liberals and lefties flapping about and foaming at the mouth as 30 years of the political correction dogma is instantly overthrown finally.

-1 ( +5 / -6 )

Yes, JAL is screening - as are every airline on earth. This is something airlines are required to do and why your PPort/docs are always checked for visas when departing Japan. Any airline carrying inadmissible passengers is subject to cost of return passage AND potential fine. Airlines - businesses - have no choice in the matter.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

liberals and lefties flapping about and foaming at the mouth

If that was all they were doing, fine. Here's a human rights leftie at the Portland Airport protest sucker punching and knocking out a lone Trump supporter.

https://mobile.twitter.com/jetrotter/status/825957670523912192

The hate is all too obvious.

-2 ( +4 / -6 )

FizzBit: "The hate is all too obvious."

Yeah, a lone Trump supporter getting sucker punched is hate, but you defend a Trump supporter who assaults a female Muslim worker at an airport and screams "Trump is here! He's going to get rid of all you!" and even more racial BS. Never mind that you support a ban on an entire people but don't see any problems with it.

-2 ( +4 / -6 )

Abe, and maybe even Japan, is one of the biggest US lapdogs and kiss-***es. Even other close Western US allies are condemning Trump's policy.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Never mind that you support a ban on an entire people but don't see any problems with it.

Good grief. It is not a ban on an entire people. It is a 90-day measure that applies to all citizens of just seven countries, six of which are failed states that cannot provide adequate information for vetting visa applicants and the seventh being a state sponsor of terror. It is not specific to Muslims - Christians and atheists from these countries are affected by the same ban. Furthermore, exceptions for “foreign nationals traveling on diplomatic visas, North Atlantic Treaty Organization visas, C-2 visas for travel to the United Nations, and G-1, G-2, G-3, and G-4 visas” are expressly made in the Executive. The Departments of State and Homeland Security can also grant exceptions on a “case-by-case basis,” and “when in the national interest, issue visas or other immigration benefits to nationals of countries for which visas and benefits are otherwise blocked.”

0 ( +4 / -4 )

When any airline drop these people in any US airport they will, be arrested and to be entailed as the same way JFK air pport had to do this is Presidential order in USA.. Japanese airlines are protecting passengers to be entailed in USA airports.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Unfortunately, I suppose they have to do this, otherwise they'll be stuck with having to bring the passengers back to Japan if they are refused entry into the U.S. I fear there are going to be some heated arguments at airports in Japan between passengers and hapless airline check-in staff.

Too bad. Trump is doing more damage in record time than any other elected leader in recent memory. He's the most despised man on the planet right now - and that is something that he, his supporters and the Republican leadership should be ashamed of.

I agree wholeheartedly with you, besides, did you know that also people from the U.S. that have a green card even if they are not from the 7 countries are advised not to leave the country, in the account that the U.S. might not allow re-entry? it is too much!!!

and they only should be ashamed also all the goons that voted for him...

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Collaboration with Trump's racist orders. Shame on them.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

As Strangerland mentioned Jal should not face criticism for this because they don't have an alternative to this. They are forced to do so because of the executive orders which have been implemented.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Dow just dropped almost 1%. This maniac is creating instability all over the globe. He and his cronies don't think of consequences before they put in motion their crazy antics. He's taking care of 'easy' promises like announcing he's starting to build the wall between U.S. and Mexico, and over the weekend shut out all Muslims from the U.S. He can say and do some of these things with a stroke of a pen. Can a stroke of a pen build factories and put his unemployed base back to work next weekend? Plus if we're talking huge factories, they'd be unionized. Republicans hate unions.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Dow just dropped almost 1%. This maniac is creating instability all over the globe

Who is fear-mongering here now? The dow crossed the 20,000 point threshold, a record, and profit taking is a normal part of the dow when records are hit.

You are just as guilty of helping to assist.....folks have to realize that saying things does not mean that they automatically will happen, even signing executive orders does not automatically mean everything is going to happen, as evidenced by the federal judge that stopped it. Yeah a few people were inconvenienced, and the media is going apeshit about it.,....

Folks should cool the hell down and take a deep breath and THINK.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

But they don't have balls, nor have they ever. They kow-tow to any nation under the sun if it may affect trade and/or economics, then ask other nations not to look badly upon it.

Please, give us a link showing JAL doing just what you quoted.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

I disagree with a Muslim ban and a country based ban, but I think every foreign traveller entering the US (and my own country) should be required to check a box on their arrival card explicitly declaring that secular man-made laws of the state are superior to all religious law in all circumstances, that they believe men and women enjoy universal equal rights, that every person has a universal right to chose or leave their religion without negative consequences, that people have a universal right to choose their sexual orientation etc. These are the most basic principles of freedom and equality in our society, yet even moderate Muslims would struggle to agree to them on even the most liberal interpretation of the Quran. That should concern everyone.

It has nothing to do with freedom or rights, the US is not in any circumstance required to let anyone in from any country if there are concerns about the security of an individual(s) coming from countries that have a history of terrorism or are hostile to the US. We allow Muslims from 46 other countries on average 680,000 yearly and many of them are from muslim countries, so the argument this temporary ban is racist or anti-muslim makes great headlines for the left and their followers, but nothing more.

The vast majority of immigrants are peace-loving people who share the values that have made western society such a desirable place go live in.

No one is disputing that and that was never the issue. I'm from California, go to the city of Glendale, it's practically a little Persia. No problems, racial attacks, hatred, on the contrary. The Persian and Iraqi population are such a big part of our identity as Southern Californians, it's hard to imagine what Glendale would be like without them.

It would be wonderful to say that all immigrants share these values, but unfortunately a small minority come to practice the same regressive values and ideologies that have made the societies they are fleeing from some of the most miserable societies in human history. We really owe it to our neighbours and all decent immigrants to keep these people out at all costs. It was disturbing to see the praying protesters at the Dallas airport baggage claim where men and women were segregated. Is that what America wants to encourage?

I think the people that are level-headed can make that distinction clearly. I totally could understand if it was a complete ban and NEVER allowing people from these countries to enter the US or denying them visas, green cards or the possibility to becoming naturalized citizens, then they would have a serious legitimate complaint to make.

Well, you call what Trump does "smart". At least you don't deny his acts of cowardice,

I don't see it at all as an act of "cowardice."

even if you won't admit that standing up to them and saying what's wrong is wrong instead of trying to curry favour with Trump isn't brave.

Sorry, I'm 100% with Trump on this and if it were up to me, I would add the Saudis and the Pakistanis.

I mean, just look at how badly Abe is trying to please Trump, as he also did with Putin, and many other leaders in the region. He knows he HAS to in part after how badly he's miffed China.

Ok, so what's your point?

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Well, required or not, It will not surprise me to see JAL doing more than required in that matter of screening and banning citizen to move freely, JAL (only) already decided to boycott Paris and suspended all flight from Narita after the terrorist attack in France, ANA did not suspend their flights and probably welcomed the extra customers...

http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2015/12/16/business/corporate-business/jal-suspending-paris-narita-flights-terrorist-attacks-hurt-demand/#.WI_PnVN96Uk

0 ( +2 / -2 )

I just got back from the states and I was prescreened before getting on the plane. It's perfectly normal and protects the passengers as well as the law.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

bass4funk JAN. 31, 2017 - 08:38AM JST It has nothing to do with freedom or rights, the US is not in any circumstance required to let anyone in from any country if there are concerns about the security of an individual(s) coming from countries that have a history of terrorism or are hostile to the US.

There is a long process for refugees to make it to the U.S. Most of them are first screened by the UN high commissioner for refugees, which then refers them to various countries, including the U.S. The U.S. government then screens them through multiple intelligence databases, along with interviews and biometric identity checks. The entire process typically takes 18 to 24 months.There are no foolproof systems. but the current system is strong and there is no evidence any terrorists have made such an attempt thus far.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Sorry J A L. My company will now NOT use your airline.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

Dow just dropped almost 1%. This maniac is creating instability all over the globe.

And this is unusual? Did you blame Obama any of the multiple times it happened during his administration and call him a maniac?

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

sfjp330Jan. 31, 2017 - 02:24PM JST There is a long process for refugees to make it to the U.S. Most of them are first screened by the UN high commissioner for refugees, which then refers them to various countries, including the U.S. The U.S. government then screens them through multiple intelligence databases, along with interviews and biometric identity checks. The entire process typically takes 18 to 24 months.There are no foolproof systems. but the current system is strong and there is no evidence any terrorists have made such an attempt thus far.

So if 6 of the 7 nations are pretty much a "failed state" as far as their governments go, what is the UN/USA going to check against? Where is the valid information coming from? The 7th state, Iran, is a state sponsor of terror, so they would not exactly be a trusted country to verify someones identity.

Honestly, this would have been better if Saudi Arabia and Turkey were added. What the US is trying to prevent is something like this:

http://www.dw.com/en/germanys-migration-office-failed-to-detect-fake-passports-say-officials/a-19559065

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Not a fan of Trump and certainly not a fan of how he is going about this, however this has been going on since 2007 as mandated by DHS. This is not news.

JAL is not banning them from flying but advising them of the entry ban (as I am sure every other airline in the world flying to the U.S. is doing). Very much a common sense response.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites