London ban for US service staff

12 July, 2005

Thousands of US military personnel based in the UK have been banned from travelling to London in the wake of Thursday's bomb attacks.

A spokeswoman from RAF Mildenhall said: "The order was made in a battle staff directive from our wing commander."

She added personnel - most of them from US Air Force units based at UK airfields - would not be allowed to go within the M25 orbital motorway.

Family members who are also from the US are also being urged to stay away.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4673987.stm


So now we have a travel ban to LONDON for our military? So much for W making the world safer for democracy.

what chance does everyone else have? :shrug:

Seems very strange to this old vet.

Maybe the Brits have their own suspicions about who actually pulled this off and don't want any more "help" from the US?

Not sure what to make of this.

The basic idea is that measures are taken to reduce the military's vulnerability to terrorist acts.

In some cases, the measures make sense. In others, they represent overcaution on the part of commanding officers who are determined that no "incidents" will occur during their tenure of command.

Cheers

Details of the travel ban, enforced on Friday, emerged as US President George W Bush said the US would "not retreat in the face of terrorists"

Has the US military EVER taken a step like this?

Berlin?

It is all one country now.

was this place called "East Berlin" and this thing called the "Cold War" and the communists were in East Berlin and they were godless enemies of freedom and all that shit and we all did "duck and cover" at school. My question was whether our troops in their free time (then, when Germany was not all one country) could go to East Berlin? Which, if it were the case, would be strange and ironic in contrast to our troops not being able to go to London now (when Germany is all one country). Did you know how Germany got to be not one country? Well, there was this guy named Hitler, and he took advantage of the German's belief that they had not really lost World War I....

EOM

stupid comment though. I did get what I believe is the answer to my question which appears to be "yes, sometimes, but frowned upon."

There was a brief period during the Summer of 1972 where travel to East Berlin was somewhat painless. There was however a large sign on Check point Charlie with warnings to military personnel and their dependents about travel to East Berlin. I stopped at the gate to talk to the guards -- explaining that my father was recently retired. They said that in my case travel to East Berlin was fine -- but they warned me to carefully search my purse to make sure that I did not have any US military dependent ID on me. I checked and remembered that my father had made sure I removed my dependent ID from my purse before leaving the US to spend the summer in Europe.

Even military personnel out of Uniform -- wearing civilian clothes -- can still be identified -- I can still identify off duty military and I've been away from military bases for years (much about their behavior gives clues to active duty military -- and often they wear THE shoes, they travel in groups, etc etc). My guess is that these men and women could become targets -- or this may be the logic behind this sort of order??

Berlin in civilian clothes if they chose to?

the warning was something about being Off Limits to US military and then vagueness about who really could enter.

I wanted to know if that applied to me also -- since my father was fleet reserve . . . I didn't know if the off limits rule applied to me. As I said above -- the guard told me to make sure I had no traces of military ID (even dependent ID). I remember turning my purse and wallet inside out to make sure I had no dependent ID. That's why this sticks in my mind -- even as a kid of retired military I wasn't yet in the "civilian" mind-set yet.

Retired military also checked with the MP on duty --

Since entry to East Berlin had just been relaxed -- no one really knew what the rules were and what sort of list the East German Guards were working from. We were lucky -- we were at the right place at the right time to enter and leave East Berlin without a whole lot of trouble.

What I remember was the lack of consumer goods in store windows -- and almost zero traffic on the road. On the West Berlin side the traffic was very heavy -- but on the East Berlin side you could just about walk down the middle of the road without fear of being hit.

On the way back to West Germany I got a ride with some Americans who just bought a new VW -- and when we got to the Boarder -- the East German guards nearly took the VW apart to make sure that we weren't hiding an East German citizen. This was their usual hostile behavior -- the East Berlin relaxed transit was an anomaly.

The RAF or the the US? Or was this a joint decision?

Looks like this was from the Brits. I glossed over that! Even curiouser....

The Yanks allow to the Brits (or Aussies or whoever's land the base is on) to make these kind of statements but we all know who really pulls the strings.

As if the USAF would take orders from the RAF ...

From the article:
'Safety paramount'

Most of the 12,000 US personnel in the UK are based at Mildenhall and Lakenheath.

"We are concerned about the safety of our folks and are trying to do what we can to protect them," RAF Mildenhall spokesman Matt Tulis said.

"This is the best course of action right now."

Is anyone else embarrassed by this? I recall Guliani and Bush begging people to not give up on New York after 9-11, come on over. Bush telling people to go shopping and go to Disney World and not be afraid to do their planned activities. What happened to 'we will not falter'? This appears to be faltering.

Who hasn't?

peace.

Are they banned too, or just military personnel and their families?

This strikes me as very, very odd.

Not sure which is more appropriate, :scared: or :tinfoilhat:

from American forces... in the name of democracy, you know.

to let Blair know how much he cares?

Sounds like a slap in the face to me.

They must be afraid of US military presence provoking another terrorist strike. I don't see where it makes any sense in any other context unless I'm missing something.

At first I thought this was issued by the US, but now see it came from the UK.

I really don't know what to make of it...

On edit: No, the US issued the order. :crazy:

thar's gold in them thar A-rab deserts - black gold, Texas tea - wouldn't want to crimp Halliburtons style by banning travel now, would we?

was the travel ban issued by the RAF for US military or did the US military issue the ban?

Kind of a slap in the face to a city whose headline on Saturday to the bombers was "GO TO HELL".

*scratches head*

RAF Mildenhall and RAF Lakenheath are American bases with American commanders. The RAF is not issuing the orders.

Sending soldiers into Iraq,...prohibiting them from going to London?

That strikes me as odd as hell. *scratches head*

In Bushco's Bizarro world, Iraq is perfectly safe - but London? Oh, the danger! Oh, the horror!

London isn't safe for our servicemembers? Where is the rest of the story?

It wasn't for the safety of U.S. servicemen. The Brits see them as some problem.

my son is usaf, stationed in germany. he and his wife have plans to travel to london and then on to spain for holiday next month.

:shrug:

http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2-2005320119,00.html

... But one airman said: “If Londoners can carry on as normal so should we. This is totally the wrong position to take.

... Patricia Yates, of tourism authority VisitBritain, said: “Police say London is open for business. This goes against that.”

One villager near Lakenheath called it “a typical American over-reaction”.

That's kinda' freaky.

You see, us furriners hate the US for its freedoms, not for the way that a certain percentage of its population and leadership display unfathomable levels of hypocrisy and rudeness, usually at the most inappropriate time.

When NYC was hit, Little Bush was saying "It's your duty to shop". Now LOndon, which depends heavily on the tourist trade, has been hit, he tells them to go fuck themselves.

to stay out of NYC after the 9-11 attacks. The freepers would have had hissy fits. Oh that's right, there are no British troops here to give such an order to. It's just the US who has troops stationed in over half the countries in the world.

British troops in NYC is somehwat of a historically loaded concept!

visited them once again is because of Blair's association with you know who!

So who issued it?

so cornfused.

to do anything. I think the article is clear that the orders came from the USAF.

"The US air force said the order had been made in the interests of the safety of its troops.

He said the US sympathised with Londoners, but added: "While it's important for some to carry on business as usual, the interests in keeping the air force out of harm's way until we have a bit more knowledge about what has happened is greater than the need to send them back into the city."

The US air force said the order had been made in the interests of the safety of its troops.

:scared:

U.S. tells troops to stay out of London after bombs

July 11, 2005

LONDON (Reuters) - All 12,000 members of the U.S. Air Force stationed in Britain have been banned from visiting London because of last week's bombings, newspapers reported on Tuesday, and one daily slammed the decision as "timid."

American military chiefs issued the "battle staff directive" on Friday, a day after bombs on three underground trains and a double-decker bus killed at least 52 people, The Daily Telegraph and The Times newspapers reported.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20050712/ts_nm/security_britain_usa_dc

:shrug: Does this make any sense?

US TELLS FORCES TO 'STAY OUT OF LONDON'

http://www.drudgereport.com/flash3dm.htm

All 12,000 members of the U.S. Air Force stationed in Britain have been told not to travel inside inner London because of the risk of further bomb attacks.

The news provoked fury from British MPs who pointed out that the UK had been America's staunchest ally in the wake of September 11.

-more-

:rolleyes:

Does that man ever tire of the taste of his feet?

Cripes, how embarrassing.:blush:

and thought the attacks weren't scheduled until this week.

Dumbshit.

What's he thinking? I guess he's waiting for the air force to soften it up a bit before we invade. The British are obviously harboring terrorists and therefore they are against us!



:sarcasm:

the C.I.A. must be somewhat off schedule -?

What's the freaking problem??

Bush & Co's motto: "The only thing we have to fear is not being afraid enough."

but he or she doesn't necessarily SOUND or ACT like a British citizen.

You would think that US military would volunteer their help to our closest allies if needed. Well on second thought....might be a bad idea.

I DON'T EVEN UNDERSTAND THE POINT OF THIS! Jeez they are just losing it totally.

... a knack for being reactive... and over-reactive.

But, I'm laughing my ass off over the stupidity.

All the comments above are right on. Looked at his calender and thought attacks were next week! CIA is off a little. He wants to send them someplace safe, like Iraq.

The only reason I'm laughing, is I just don't want to cry.

how we are the Brits stauncest allies and we stand with them, he was
ordering US troops and families to stay out of London.

If his lips are moving he's lying.

:rofl: with tears


On edit: gee. maybe he has inside info that there are going to be more bombings. How could he know that?

:cry: I am just devastated. It is so awful what has happened in London. :cry:

does that sound familiar???


should I make an aluminum foil hat? or am I okay?

in the UK. Tinfoil hat may be required on my part.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,22989-1690391,00.html

From The Times UK Online

“The public anger will strengthen Tony Blair’s hand as he prepares to speed up new anti-terrorist laws to help the hunt for the bombers. “If, as the fuller picture about these incidents emerges and the investigation proceeds, it becomes clear that there are powers which the police and intelligence agencies need immediately to combat terrorism, it is plainly sensible to reserve the right to return to Parliament with an accelerated timetable,” he said. “

*********
That's how they/he used 9 11 to start police state tactics in the US
violating the Constitution and our civil rights. It's called the
Patriot Act here. Wonder what wonderful name they'll give it in
Britain.

Will he do it? He has the opportunity to prove himself as a world leader. Will he use it or continue to be shrubs poodle?

It is awful, but Bush has a tendency, always, to do the dumbest things at the wrong times. I really don't know if our nation can survive another three and a half years of this.

Blair is so much more articulate and so much smarter than than *.
I have no idea how he fell in w/ * and his gang.

I am at a loss for words and for any plan at this point in time.

I live in GA in the US. I am in Bu$hland and am so very worried about the future.

conquering and cowing the people intheir own countries, taking away their freedom without firing a shot.

Better than Hitler.

Our misleader just can't handle the fact that they're not cowering & going along with his scare-the-sh*t-out-of-the-people routine.

The British MPs were right to be furious at his latest scare tactic at a time when they're encouraging their citizens not to cow down. I admire them for not shooting from the hip by encroaching their freedom & citizens' rights.

Our misleader sure doesn't mind our troops being subjected to suicide bombings without the proper equipment in Iraq, though. But he doesn't want them in London?

Way to inspire confidence in our British friends, Mr pResident...

:sarcasm:

... about how Brits need to get tough and wake up and smell the coffee and prepare to play their part in the thousand year 'Murrican Crusade.

And then the C-in-C orders the American troops in the UK to wimp out.

Hope the Top Brass (and the Other Ranks)are going to have something to say about that.

The Skin

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=355315&in_page_id=1770&in_a_source=&ct=5

For the record, I don't see *'s name mentioned anywhere.

Pretty messed up of drudge to claim this is a scoop, when the Daily Mail already published the story.

jarab

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4673987.stm

Thousands of US military personnel based in the UK have been banned by commanders from travelling to London in the wake of Thursday's bomb attacks.

Personnel, most of them from US Air Force units at RAF Mildenhall and RAF Lakenheath, in Suffolk, have been told not to go within the M25 motorway.

Family members who are from the US are also being urged to stay away.

The US air force said the order had been made in the interests of the safety of its troops.

Bush** is the CIC and a war president. Therefore one must presume he either ordered this high profile banning or approved it. If it was done without his knowledge then he really isn't all that, is he? Either way he looks like the smeg he is.

Henry Kissinger speaking at Evian, France, May 21, 1992 Bilderburg
meeting. Unbeknownst to Kissinger, his speech was taped by a Swiss
delegate to the meeting.


"Today Americans would be outraged if U.N. troops entered Los Angeles to restore order; tomorrow they will be grateful.

This is especially true if they were told there was an outside threat from beyond, whether real or promulgated, that threatened our very existence. It is then that all peoples of the world will plead with world leaders to deliver them from this evil.

The one thing every man fears is the unknown.

When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well being granted to them by their world government."
--

... the US forces are doing this, is because the British are (to BushCo's horror) not treating the London attacks with sufficient panic. In other words, the British are refusing to what Bush likes to do: terrorize their own population.

Also, the British are doing the unthinkable: they're treating the bombings as 4 large... get this: CRIME SCENES! Geez... didn't the British get BushCo's talking points? The "crime" word is verboten... the "war" word is officially in.

(end of rant)

-P

who do they think they're fooling?
Bomb response exercises going on that day in all three locations-?
If Chimp's planning to blow up some more targets in London he wants to make sure our troops arent there.

I had heard about the exercise in the (nameless)company, but not of any others.

this headline is completely misleading.....

According to all reports on BBC news, this was an order given at a local level on the day of the bombings, when British authorities were requesting that nobody came into London. It just hasn't been overturned yet.

Of course, it does make Bush look stupid if his military are ordering their guys to stay out of London when he's saying, "the US would "not retreat in the face of terrorists"...and..."In this difficult hour, the people of Great Britain can know the American people stand with you." However, it's local military commanders who have issued this order, not Bush.

I'd expect this order to be overturned within a matter of hours.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4673987.stm

:rofl:

On edit, I'm supposed to be in London next month.
I'm going to call the embassy tomorrow and see what they say about
Americans traveling to London.

If that order is rescinded " in a matter of hours" I'll buy you a pint and if not, and if I can still go, you have to buy me tea and
scones at the Ritz, or at least the Savoy.

:bounce:

BBC story updated (at same link) - travel ban lifted.

it's going to cost me a pint, I want to see it in writing :)

:hi:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4673987.stm

Currently reads 'Last updated 11:06 GMT 12:06 UK time'

Can we make it a pint of gin?

:evilgrin:

P.

prices over there are way high. Think they'll let me in with a pint of gin in my bag? They'll think I'm a regular tippler!

:)

:woohoo:

at local level.

They chose their words very carefully there.

Thousands of US military personnel based in the UK have been banned by commandersfrom traveling to London in the wake of Thursday's bomb attacks.

Note that they do not state how high up the source of the command was.

you're just a bunch of burger eating surrender monkeys :-)

with everyone. they're trying to put the fear into the UK's government... probably over some disagreement between bushie and blairie.

I hope carry the banner for DU, as well as carry all the best wishes and support that the REAL people of the USA would want to extend to Londoners.

Maybe the dangers of being in uniform would be mitigated if we had a Commander in Chief who had a CLUE? As in... not painting a red bull's eye on the back of every US soldier because of rude, ruthless, illegal US policies.

He continues to be the biggest embarrassment this nation has ever produced.

"not painting a red bull's eye on the back of every US soldier "

I'm told Americans have been wearing Canadian pins for quite awhile, so as not to be identified as American on the streets of Europe.

He just didnt do it to the soldiers.

And it looks like he didnt just do it to us Americans.

He painted a bullseye on the entire Western civilization, that %(*^)

Be careful, look under every seat, check out everyone, and then have a good time :)

well, then, if they're stationed in germany, for example, they are good to go?

Here's a better idea: ban them from Iraq.

that everyone is having fits about it.

Way to go Bu$hCo. I hope Blair starts to wake up and realizes how much his good buddy Bu$h just loves to use and abuse him.

amazing. simply amazing....

LONDON (AFP) - A ban on US air force personnel entering London in the wake of last week's deadly bombings has been lifted, the US embassy in the British capital said.


The move followed criticism from police, politicians and tourism officials, who are determined to show that life is returning to normal here in the wake of Thursday's bombings that killed more than 50 people.

Some 10,000 US servicemen and women at two air bases in the east of England were ordered to keep out of London after bombs exploded on four subway trains and a double-decker bus -- the worst attack in Britain since World War II.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20050712/wl_uk_afp/britainattacksus_050712111456;_ylt=Amc2njUM3AN0_f1eJyO06CK9Q5gv;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl

to be very vindictive you know, and maybe this was a lil payback
or threat to Tony, becasue Tony wasn't towing his line.

we put nothing past this particular US administration. Believe it.

okay, I owe Pert 1/2 a pint and Pert owes me 1/2 a scone with clotted cream and jam, (because it was not lifted in hours from when it was put on - and I doubt it would have been lifted if we all, Brits and Muricans, hadn't been on here raising hell. :toast:

What do you think? is 1/2 and 1/2 fair?

:)
Pallas

I'm sure if you guys hadn't made that bet... the ban would still stand! ;-)

yes. Half and half seems fair to me.

:toast:

It must be a standard procedure because in Spain also there was a ban for US military against traveling to Spain...don´t really understand the logic of it...

and I suspect its because not too many of the comments are from service members or former service members. What I can tell you all is that this sort of order is very common and indeed expected in light of what happened in London.

Indeed when I was stationed in Germany there was a temporary ban on travel to the area around Bayreuth (I remember this well because I had a Fraulein living in the that particular city) due to the possibility of neo-nazi demonstrations taking place commemorating Hitler's birthday or some such shit. Well it was well known that such demonstrations were illegal in Germany and just as soon as anyone made any such display they would likely be arrested. (I even once witnessed such an arrest take place) But despite this the base commander still issued a ban on travel to the area in question as American military personnel could become targets for violence.

The same is likely true for London the risk for american military personnel being much greater than the example above. There are probably a handful of reasons for the ban, all of which are for the safety of US military personnel. There are some blokes who are not very fond of American military folk (I witnessed some veiled hostility back in the 1980's and I'm not sure if this has changed much) and seeing an american soldier (or airman as the case may be) strutting down the street could be a rather painful reminder to the Brit of just who may have stirred up the hornets nest. Our hapless GI might serve as a proxy for Bush in receiving such resentments. And there is the likelihood of some other elements that would relish the idea of doing harm to an american soldiers.

The ban on London is probably not permanent and will likely be lifted after a while.

the ban is already lifted :) (I really have to learn to type faster!)

RAF is a prefix for all air force bases in the UK. RAF in this case does not mean the actual Royal Air Force, it means literally Air Force Base.

RAF Mildenhall in the states would be Mildenhall AFB.

We were stationed at RAF Lakenheath (just down the road) for four years in the mid 80s, I loved going to London... this really sucks.

I wonder about London Central now though... what are all those kids supposed to do? Stay inside?