View Full Version : Body Scanners: Will you go for the genital feel up or the nude photos and a cancer?

Mr. Hat
10th Nov 2010, 23:00
As with many issues in our industry we can see the possible Australian future if we look over to the US. Unlike many developed countries, our government tends to just follow blindly whatever the US think is the right course of action. We live in a country that has a highly reactive rather than a proactive system. Populist policies that when looked at in detail often don't actually work.

Case in point - a man is bashed to death in Sydney Airport whilst deodorants are being confiscated at security "check" points. Or pilots going thru security whilst caterers, cleaners and baggage handlers come and go as they please.

I've noticed that everything from bank interest rates to airport security gets looked at by the government only in response to media attention after an incident. Once it dies down everything returns to normal.

So will we see body scanners in Australia? I reckon we will. Its an easy fix and thats the way we do things here.

Here are some articles from Plane Talking (http://blogs.crikey.com.au/planetalking/) worth a read and the AIRLINE BIZ Blog | dallasnews.com (http://aviationblog.dallasnews.com/):

US air travellers get a wake up touch up – Plane Talking (http://blogs.crikey.com.au/planetalking/2010/11/11/us-air-travellers-get-a-wake-up-touch-up/)

Union president tells US Airways pilots to avoid body scanners | AIRLINE BIZ Blog | dallasnews.com (http://aviationblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2010/11/union-president-tells-us-airwa.html)

8:38 AM Tue, Nov 09, 2010 | Permalink
Terry Maxon/Reporter Bio | E-mail | News tips

The head of the pilot union at US Airways is advising his members not to go through the body scanners, the same recommendation that the Allied Pilots Association president at American Airlines had given his members.

The reason in both cases was health-related: The union leaders say pilots shouldn't submit to the repeated doses of radiation.

President Mike Cleary of the US Airline Pilots Association said pilots should first search for a security checkpoint that doesn't have the scanners.

If that's not possible, the pilots should opt for the pat-down by a Transportation Security Administration officer, with a member of the pilot's crew witnessing.

The TSA recently changed its hand-search policies. Before, the officers would use the back of their hand to check a person; now they are to use their open hand and fingers to go over one's body, including the genital area and breasts.

Cleary said after a pat-down, the pilot should determine if he or she is emotionally fit to fly. He also said the pilots' association doesn't like any of it:

"Let's be perfectly clear: the TSA procedures we have outlined above are blatantly unacceptable as a long-term solution. Although an immediate solution cannot be guaranteed, I can promise you that your union will not rest until all U.S. airline pilots have a way to reach their workplace ... the aircraft ... without submitting ourselves to the will of a TSO behind closed doors.
"This situation has already produced a sexual molestation in alarmingly short order. Left unchecked, there's simply no way to predict how far the TSA will overreach in searching and frisking pilots who are, ironically, mere minutes from being in the flight deck.

"As we all know, it makes no difference what a pilot has on his or her person or in their luggage, because they have control of the aircraft throughout the entire flight. The eyewash being dribbled by the TSA in this instance is embarrassingly devoid of common sense, and we will not stand for it."

Below, I've put Cleary's entire message, except for some contact phone numbers.

November 8, 2010
President's Message

Fellow Pilots,

The TSA's rapid deployment of Advanced Imaging Technology (AIT) screening machines, followed by the new Enhanced Pat-Down procedures, have caused turmoil for airline pilots and the traveling public alike. These changes are far reaching, intrusive and have been implemented almost overnight, leaving little time for groups who are adversely affected to form a response.

On October 21, USAPA's Security Committee issued an update on the new AIT scanners and outlined our options for dealing with the new rules. Since that time several pilots and flight attendants have encountered problems with TSOs and their implementation of the rules. One US Airways pilot, after being selected for an enhanced pat-down, experienced a frisking that has left him unable to function as a crewmember. The words this pilot used to describe the incident included "sexual molestation," and in the aftermath of trying to recover, this pilot reported that he had literally vomited in his own driveway while contemplating going back to work and facing the possibility of a similar encounter with the TSA. This is a very serious situation, and it represents a crossroads for all U.S. airline pilots.

One of the difficulties is the TSA's intentional random application of the rules. While it might be effective for their purposes, it wreaks havoc with our ability to inform our pilots on how to handle each and every situation.

Here is a summary of USAPA's current position on AIT screening machines and Enhanced Pat-Down procedures:

• Pilots should NOT submit to AIT screening. The TSA has offered no credible specifications for the radiation emitted by these machines. As pilots, we are exposed to more radiation as a function of our normal duties than nearly every other category of worker in the United States. Based on currently available medical information, USAPA has determined that frequent exposure to TSA-operated scanner devices may subject pilots to significant health risks.
• Pilots should employ the following method of avoiding AIT screening:

o Make every effort to use security access lines that utilize standard magnetometer devices. If security access points with magnetometer devices are not available, or if there is a change in the device being used once in line, pilots should elect to submit to a private TSA-agent pat-down.
o When submitting to a private, enhanced pat-down procedure, pilots must be sure that a witness, preferably a crewmember, accompanies them during the pat-down.

o After being subjected to an enhanced pat-down procedure, pilots must evaluate their fitness for duty. As has been determined, there is a wide range of possibilities once you submit to a private screening, and the results can be devastating. Unacceptable as this is to all USAPA pilots, and until these invasive measures are no longer implemented on airline pilots, it is your responsibility to make sure you are emotionally fit and not stressed in any way by your close encounter with the TSA.

• Remain professional and courteous in all situations.

• Contact any member of the Security Committee if you need any assistance.

[Names redacted.]

Let's be perfectly clear: the TSA procedures we have outlined above are blatantly unacceptable as a long-term solution. Although an immediate solution cannot be guaranteed, I can promise you that your union will not rest until all U.S. airline pilots have a way to reach their workplace ... the aircraft ... without submitting ourselves to the will of a TSO behind closed doors. This situation has already produced a sexual molestation in alarmingly short order. Left unchecked, there's simply no way to predict how far the TSA will overreach in searching and frisking pilots who are, ironically, mere minutes from being in the flight deck. As we all know, it makes no difference what a pilot has on his or her person or in their luggage, because they have control of the aircraft throughout the entire flight. The eyewash being dribbled by the TSA in this instance is embarrassingly devoid of common sense, and we will not stand for it.

USAPA's Security Committee and USAPA Legal are working diligently on several fronts to find an acceptable remedy. I directed our legal team to request of the TSA, pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act, any written materials that contain the protocol for conducting these enhanced pat-downs. Should this situation not be resolved by working with the TSA, we will take our concerns to Capitol Hill. On a parallel track, we are working with the other CAPA pilot unions to find allies in our struggle. Make no mistake; this is a fight to restore the dignity we deserve as the last line of defense against terrorists who would use airplanes as weapons of mass destruction. We are not the enemy, and we will not stand for being treated as such before each duty period. The TSA needs to recognize professional airline pilots for the security asset that we are, even as many of us serve as Federal Flight Deck Officers. There are a number of access mechanisms available as a remedy, including CrewPass and biometric identification. These solutions will allow the TSA to capitalize on airline pilots as security assets.

This letter is meant to provide you with important interim guidance as we seek long-term solutions. Please stay up to date on this critical affront to our profession. Documentation will be a critical element to this battle. Therefore, should you have any difficulties traversing security, please outline the incident with as much detail as possible, including TSO names and badge numbers, and send it immediately to [email protected] I urge each of you to continue to maintain your ultimate professionalism in the face of these attacks on our profession. As you maintain your composure, your union will fight unequivocally with all of our resources and allies to right this wrong.


Captain Mike Cleary

What will our unions say or do if the body scanner comes to our shores?

Worth a poll Tailwheel? Feel up or Pic?

10th Nov 2010, 23:19
Unions (Pilots & CC anyway) I believe are already on the case & AIPA has a briefing on 9th December from SME's in this field.

Issues will be within OHS rather than industrial arena - should be an interesting battle between applicable State and Federal legislation.

That said, The Minister for Mascot and the assorted Depts under his delegation need to get off their collective backsides and try a bit of consultation.

As for the TSA - esp in LAX..........:mad:


Howard Hughes
11th Nov 2010, 00:06
Feel up of course!:E

The Minister for Mascot

Mr. Hat
11th Nov 2010, 04:01
Not the standard pat down Howard!!

The open hand procedures mandated for America’s totally out of control Transport Security Administration involve manually determining the orientation of the penis and testicles in order to determine whether they are in fact explosive devices as well as pressure to female genitalia

It's a gettin pretty strange:ugh:!!

Worrals in the wilds
11th Nov 2010, 04:39
Some magazine in the US has labelled it the Scope Or Grope option :E.

The open hand procedures mandated for America’s totally out of control Transport Security Administration involve manually determining the orientation of the penis and testicles

That is standard in a Customs frisk search for prohibited substances. The difference, of course, is that they must have reasonable grounds for detaining you, unlike the all encompassing TSA stuff. Nor do they do all that many of them. That said, pat downs aren't worth a cent unless you're looking for relatively large objects.

And no, I don't support this level of security in Australia. If you get to this stage you may as well just make everyone to fly in the nude with no luggage. As a female airport worker I would be really uncomfortable about some of the security people here having access to those sorts of images. At least I have the option of staying out of the terminals.

Angle of Attack
11th Nov 2010, 09:16
I already refuse explosive detection in public and require the private screening option, its good because it means some monkey manager also has to come in to make sure the procedures are done properly. Quite frankly I use all of the monkeys to their maximum resources because I CAN and I do consistently. It makes me laugh too. The best thing is after I fertilized my lawn it was like a major security alert while I relaxed because I was being paid while these monkeys crapped on about me. Meanwhile let the delays begin while the monkeys stay behind in their little world (Which is about 100 square meters! lol! We will always win and think about it that way, I mean quite frankly what is the effectivness of the screenings for pilots? Nothing, thats why I call them monkeys. Worthless peanut eaters.

PS They like bananas too

11th Nov 2010, 09:32
PS They like bananas too

Tip - put a banana down your pants and go for the pat down....

Or will that be considered a bribe?

teresa green
11th Nov 2010, 10:02
How things have changed. A patdown carried out on a pilot of 20 years ago would probably almost certainly bring on a "piss off mate" the for the patee. I hope this is still the reaction.

Mr. Hat
11th Nov 2010, 11:30
I'm hearing you TG.

I got a verbal at security the other day. My crime? Forgot i had some water in my bag (intl.). I suspect that wouldn't have happened in your day either. Occasionally though I fly with guys that don't tolerate it. Makes for an entertaining trip!

Where did the respect go?

I guess this stuff will get more press/attention when these scanners start rocking up.

11th Nov 2010, 12:51
While they're scrutinising you for having a bottle of water in your bag I'm outside repairing a part with my multi tool on the same apron. Yeah that makes sense. :ugh:

Why cant they offer the same private access to airline crews as other operators/airport ground staff.

Finally what makes the screening staff immune to breaching security? Are they and custom staff sworn into the job? If so why cant the crews be given that option.

11th Nov 2010, 13:09
11 November 2010

Attention all Long Haul Cabin Crew


In coming weeks it is likely that the issues associated with whole body scanning at airport security checkpoints will become a news item. The Federal Government intends to introduce this security screening procedure as early as next year.

During the past 12 months, your Union has been monitoring the deployment of whole body ionising scanners at airports and the operation of these units in other countries. Melbourne OH&S Representative & FAAA Delegate, Brian Wilson has been coordinating this work.

The FAAA has also been in contact with prominent specialists including scientists who developed the whole body scanning system at the direction of then US President George Bush following 'September 11' – the FAAA is also working with the Pilots Union (AIPA), Qantas and OH&S specialists at Trades Hall.

Currently the Australian Government has not undertaken any formal consultation with Aircrew despite the presence of 'trial units' in Sydney and Melbourne in 2009.There are also numerous discrepancies between State based OH&S legislation. (For example there is no agreed national standard in connection ionising radiation and in Victoria; there are no limits whatsoever to the amount of radiation an employee can be exposed to).

Amongst our concerns are the exposure risks to pregnant crew or crew who may be recovering from cancer or similar conditions. These concerns are particularly important given that frequent scans may be imposed, Aircrew have no means by which to monitor the amount of radiation they are exposed to and there is no provision for refusal.

The FAAA is also concerned that as yet no procedures have been developed for the operation of these radiation devices and that they may be operated by casual security contractors without appropriate training or qualifications.

Together with the Base OH&S Committees, the FAAA will continue to monitor the Australian Government's progress and will seek proper consultation, accurate information and importantly, assurances of your safety.

We will issue updates as appropriate, however Crew (both Members and non-members) are encouraged to forward any questions or comments to [email protected]

Written by Brian Wilson - FAAA QCCA Delegate and Regulatory Affairs
and authorised by Michael Mijatov – Secretary International Division

Mr. Hat
11th Nov 2010, 21:40
The line the unions should be taking in my opinion is this:

Baggage handlers, caterers and cleaners are not subject to this screening and thus the possible long term side effects it may cause. It is therefore the case that screening aircrew is an unnecessary potentially harmful procedure that in actual fact does not render airside "sterile" at all.

Jokes aside I fear this is actually quite a serious matter. I know we will hear from some expert that argues that its in no way harmful. How many times have these "experts" over time been proven wrong. Mobile phones, asbestos and who knows what else.

I think i'd be very slightly more comfortable if the screening of aircrew did in actual fact render airside totally sterile. The reality however is that its a staged populist policy so the travelling public think that its totally safe to travel by air.

If its no good for pregnant aircrew its no good for any aircrew.

11th Nov 2010, 22:02
The line will be 'there is no evidence of any danger in undergoing these scans'. Obviously not, as they are new and there hasn't been any research into the long term consequences of multiple exposure to these particular scans; however, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.


Mr. Hat
11th Nov 2010, 22:18
Knocked it on the head obira.

11th Nov 2010, 22:53
Security is a populist policy, no screening for caterers, cleaners, baggage handlers, engineers, police (and history has well and truly proven they can't all be trusted) who else?
Freight which is loaded on board is not screened, and all this is before we even consider the benefits of screening.
Any self respecting terrorist can make his way through security without a ETD, it's a s simple as waiting until the screeners pick sme one ahead of you, we all do it, we all know it's simple.
Bullets, "grenades" and regularly other significant items make it through.

My point being it is a smoke screen is for the general publics benefit, I believe the way to fight it is in the media. Dispell the security myth publicly, high light the dangers to the general public. Public opinion is what drives our politicians, nothing else. Let the public know what really happens out there, we would all individually expect to be told the truth about public policy and procedure, why don't we grant the general public right?

Mr. Hat
11th Nov 2010, 23:20
Given all of that and the possible health implications multiple exposures might have why should we be screened multiple times.

If the government wants to play pretend let them do it without us.

11th Nov 2010, 23:56
Personal Opinion

i feel these Body Scanners are just another money making scam

person carrying illegal stuff on them self can be well detected through passenger profiling which atleast works at custom check point most of the times.

12th Nov 2010, 00:15
Customs have a lot more information re personal profiling and are certainly more highly trained than the bouncers at security.

If you talking about profiling via appearance, I could live with that personally, but can you imagine the civil libertarians and lefties. It will never happen. More likely to harass the straight, white male with a good job, no criminal record and been a citizen of this country since birth. There is no way they will select the obvious.

12th Nov 2010, 00:27
Code 89 - quite correct - in fact the spend on "security" is used as the justification for uplifts in the pax movement charges and the proposed 'infrastructure' fund.

As we all know airside access is far from sterile and the systems offer little by way of integrity, common standards and deliver nothing more than window dressing.

For instance last week (yet again) I walked airside onto the apron and through the back of house area at Y*** as did others. No check of ASIC, no screening, no nothing.

This is everyday aviation at one of the nation's capital city airports! [Oh........ and before the believers in the system respond yes it was reported - result nil action]

Whole body scanning is a waste of money and given the lack of consultation, information and knowledge, for Aircrew subjected to regular exposures it may well be aviation's version of thalidamide.

The only weapons of terror whole body scanners will reveal are those strategic and under utilised sections of some State OHS Acts to which the 'requirement to submit' under the whole body scanning procedure is wholly subordinate.

Pprune Prediction:
introduction will be delayed until after the transition of State OHS Acts to the proposed Federal Act in 2012.


12th Nov 2010, 00:58
For shorthaul crew this would amount to ~175 exposures per annum, combined with airborne exposure. Aircrew are already have one of the highest occupational radiation exposures any group.

This will not come to pass. Pilots & flight attendants will refuse this point blank. This is non-negotiable, personally I'd "dying in the ditch" to stop this.

Backscatter X-ray Health effects (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backscatter_X-ray#Health_effects) wikipedia link.

Fathers exposed to medical diagnostic x-rays are more likely to have infants who contract leukemia, especially if exposure is closer to conception or includes two or more X-rays of the lower gastrointestinal (GI) tract or lower abdomen.[30] In medical radiography the x-ray beam is adjusted to expose only the area of which an image is required, so that generally shielding is applied to the patient to avoid exposing the gonads,[31] whereas in an airport backscatter scan, the testicles of men and boys will be deliberately subjected to the direct beam, and radiation will also reach the ovaries of female subjects. Whilst the overall dose averaged over the entire body is lower in a backscatter X-ray scan than in a typical medical X-ray examination, because of the shielding of the gonads used in medical radiography this in itself does not mean that the dose to the testicles would be less in an airport scan.

Mr. Hat
12th Nov 2010, 01:31
Breakfast, without naming the organisations all I can say is we have some of the weakest most corrupt unions on the planet. Have a look at our conditions for starters.

The line will be from union and company "experts say that there are no harmful effects off you go". I'll put money on it.

I'm going to go for the genital touch up. If everybody goes for this option the delays will get out of control and something will have to be done about it.

I couldn't give a damn about privacy when faced with the option of sitting down with an oncologist in years to come or even worse bringing a child into the world who has to suffer the effects of having intellectually challenged public servants working in our country.

12th Nov 2010, 02:09
Mr Hat, I agree with your sentiments on various "organisations". I'll also go for the squirrel grip over the X-ray too, this may make an interesting public spectacle!
However, I believe that crew will take it upon themselves to avoid the X-rays, no organisation needs to back up. If WE simply refuse it, take the genital grope & then are unable to work, the system will seize up. WE HAVE THE POWER, not them. We just need to realise it as a group. This is a line that simply cannot be crossed. The union/management can go to hell, I'll take my chance in FWA & the court of public opinion.

12th Nov 2010, 02:32
What say you? We now have a poll attached :E

teresa green
12th Nov 2010, 06:32
And if a female pilot or cabin crew member is pregnant and not yet aware? What damage to the baby? Especially going thru the camera regulary. This is opening a can of worms, which is probably unnessary, but could be dangerous to the baby and even to the mum to be. The whole thing is nuts regarding crew, when for Gods sake has crew blown up a aircraft? Management perhaps, but aircraft, no.:ugh:

12th Nov 2010, 06:33
As you all know I am not an airline pilot, but you have my support in any petitions or whatever comes out in the future.

I am not in favour at all......and I see the poll asked Would you willingly submit to full body scanningThe point is willingly.

On our recent foray to Oshkosh, it was in SFO at the end of a three week trip, BeachKing and Mrs Jaba managed to dodge it, but I was ushered into the time warp machine, unwittingly and for a moment thinking this was one of those machines that blast you with air and test for explosive residues. WRONG!

At no point did anything get explained to me about what it was, would I object etc. Now a once of dose is probably not going to harm me, but the fact I was unaware, no signage, and randomly subjected is somewhat pissing me off now the more I read about it.

Will not happen again i can guarantee. Want to physically check me for concealled weapons sure no problem, beats being nuked and I will know exactly what to expect.

Any of you guys who go through SFO regularly care to enlighten me on what the rules procedures and their obligation to explain anything at all to you?


12th Nov 2010, 07:32
TG - That's the point, what purpose is this to serve? The ILLUSION of safety. The current system, whilst not desirable is tolerable because we are asked to go along with the "story" for the benefit of passengers perception. The cost is usually one of time & frustration only.

However, when implementing a system with potentially real world adverse serious health consequences for multiple generations, or sexual assault to maintain an illusion, it's not going to fly.

Are all air-side employees going to be screened every time they pass airside? If not then this is a farce. What possible benefit in terms of actual safety could be demonstrated by squeezing or irradiating the testicles of pilots? Nil.

Think of the exposure for young crew (mainly FA's) both male & female who start in their late teens or early 20's. They may potentially be exposed 2000+ times prior to starting a family. But by then the implementers of the system will be long gone, absolved of responsibility & accountability.

Implementation of this policy would confirm the descent of our world into a fascist police state. How did it ever come to this? Take control back people, no one else is looking out for you, your on your own.

12th Nov 2010, 07:34
Mr Hat...

....or even worse bringing a child into the world who has to suffer the effects of having intellectually challenged public servants working in our country.

But..........we've already got that situation, haven't we? :{

It will be interesting to see if SLF sentiments are similar to the PPRuNe poll, which admittedly still has only a small sample, but it's showing (basically) 6% yes, 94% no.

I wonder how it would correspond to SLF sentiments if an they were polled to ask if they will willingly undergo legally sanctioned full body scanning and genital groping by airport security personnel, on the basis that it's been sanctioned by intellectually-challenged public servants in the name of so-called aviation security?

I'm also with Jaba here, and am 1,000% NOT in favour of the idea at all. :mad:

This idea at best showcases the idiocy of the bureaucrats who dreamed-up this bullshit in the first place in the the name of improved security, and at worst, showcases beyond all reasonable doubt the complete and utter mindless stupidity of the Member for Mascot for believing the bureacratic bullshit without a second thought as well. :yuk: :yuk:

Mr. Hat
12th Nov 2010, 07:35
I assume those saying "No" are now waiting in line to have their private parts played with by someone who:

a) Has a lessor ASIC than most flight crew
b) Is nor a doctor or medically trained
c) and is not by chance staring in an adult film that happens to be filmed live every day around the country.

I'll also assume the fondling will take view in a private room and not in front of passengers including children.

12th Nov 2010, 08:07
Mr Hat...

a lessor ASIC than most flight crew??

I don't understand that??? :confused:

If you hold an ASIC it means that you've been the subject of a background check. There's no 'gradings' with ASICs (ie. lessor [sic] ones). You either hold one, or you don't.

I'm no longer aircrew Mr Hat, but I'm STILL required to hold an ASIC, and my security check was just as thorough as anyone else's.

I also don't see the 'No' votes as signifying any desire whatsoever to line up for a 'genital-centric grope' either. I think what the 'No' votes are actually saying Mr Hat is a firm:

'Stick it up your ar$e'

...to the brain-dead bureaucrats and Minister and who dreamed up this idiocy. :yuk: :yuk:

Federal government is rapidly overtaking local government in the stupidity stakes I think.

12th Nov 2010, 08:08
I have mentioned some time ago, when Heathrow was carrying out a trial scanner. I was asked at security would I mind being scanned? I was and was shown the screen afterwards and it left nothing to the imagination, or would have shown up whatever evil deed I had in mind once boarded.

I guess the point is being asked if you would mind being scanned as opposed to oi you get over here and lets take yer piccy.

12th Nov 2010, 08:11
I guess airport security will now become a magnet for paedophiles.
If Joe public can be convinced not to immunise their children they can for sure be convinced not to allow their kids to be exposed to this radiation. I imagine these types will flock to security for a job, just think they will get to grope kiddies "Legally".
As for the minister for Mascot, he reminds me of the straw man in the wizard of OZ..looking for a brain.

12th Nov 2010, 08:36
I think what the 'No' votes are actually saying Mr Hat is a firm:

'Stick it up your ar$e' That is exactly what my NO vote intended.

I also will not allow my underage children to pass through the scanner, and I sure as sh!t will not allow them to be touched.

12th Nov 2010, 09:00
Thanks Monopole... ;)

None of my children are underage anymore, but pity help the stupid bastard who tries a genital 'patdown' on any of them. Guaranteed response WILL be a Class 1 knockdown on the idiot who attempts it.

Same with me. I don't make threats, either. Nor does my wife. Pity help the stupid bastard who tries that with her!!

The airlines are going to be the 'patsies' in all this. SLF will start kicking and screaming at Australian government-sanctioned sexual assault when they get 'groped'. Who knows, maybe it will end-up with class-actions for psychological trauma etc etc...............Commonwealth, Minister, bureaucrats, airline, security provider, and (of course) the security 'goons' who did the groping all named as co-defendants in the ensuing court case.

Tidy little earner coming up for the legal profession I reckon.

Seriously, this proposal is madness, and it's time the government IS told loud and clear by the electorate, enough's enough, and:


Where's the popcorn? :}

Mr. Hat
12th Nov 2010, 09:03
SIUYA, just noticed the other day the security person had what looked like a restricted asic (not the red one). Found it strange that they were checking me and had a restricted asic/idcard.

I had tongue firmly in cheek for the post sorry. Didn't start the thread cause I'm in favour of it!!

Seems in US the option is to

1. Go through scanner or
2. Get the touch up.

12th Nov 2010, 09:19
Mr Hat...no problems! :8

Background colour denotes security access (ie area you're permitted to be in). Irrespective of access permission, if it's an ASIC, then it's still an ASIC for a security-controlled airport.

Many ASIC holders are non-aircrew and hold red-background ASICs because they NEED to.

Chimbu chuckles
12th Nov 2010, 09:32
I voted NO!

That is NO to being exposed to a stranger in a booth and NO to be sexually assaulted by a stranger.

This idiocy goes WAY beyond overkill and WAY beyond invasion of privacy. There are enormous issues of civil liberties and abuse of power here.

The airline I work for is crewed by mostly Muslim female cabin crew. What about peoples religious issues? What about kiddies?

The pictures this machine takes are the equivalent of porn. The grope down is sexual assault - its that simple across the board and particularly where minors are involved.

The airlines have to say NO. Will they? To begin with I would suggest they won't - after a shitload of delayed flights maybe their attitude will change.

Forget the average pax objecting - they are too stupid - it wont happen, in fact is NOT happening in the US to date.

The morons who are attempting to introduce this technology should have THEIR children patted down in this manner and see how they like it.

Mr. Hat
12th Nov 2010, 09:58
More here:

Pilots boycott full-body scanners over health fears | News.com.au (http://www.news.com.au/travel/news/pilots-boycott-naked-airport-scanners-over-health-fears/story-e6frfq80-1225947834443)

Experts hit back at claims full-body airport scanners are 'safe' | News.com.au (http://www.news.com.au/travel/news/experts-hit-back-at-claims-full-body-airport-scanners-are-safe/story-e6frfq80-1225952739293)

12th Nov 2010, 10:17

Wwhat do you mean its not happening in the US, see my last post?

To be frank, the idea of a near nude image, and its generally not quite but near enough, does not so much bother me, if its supposedly erased shortly after. Its the news that it may well be a pretty strong x-ray and frequent flying pax and airline staff are exposed up to several times a day.....and who knows? Are they wearing those radiation tags like radiologists have to? No!

The fact I was ushered into one against my will under a false impression (my own) and not explained what it was is to me a violation of civil rights, here and the USA. I am still keen to hear what the folk who transit SFO often think about the process etc.

I am almost pissed off enough about it now after reading this stuff to jump on a plane and go back there to "meet" with their airport TSA manager. And a lawyer, after which they can knock their socks off. If what I recall is common place there is some serious civil rights issues being abused by the TSA all under the guise of security. I am not against proper security, if you ask me to empty my back pack so they can Xray it or even search it, fine, but to Nuke me naked without my consent or knowlege is not acceptable any time. And that is what happened. I may have been tired and keen to get on a plane home, but I am not stupid. (maybe I was :ouch:)

Chimbu chuckles
12th Nov 2010, 10:56
What I suggested isn't happening in the US is mass civil outrage/rejection at/of the technology from the proletariate.

teresa green
12th Nov 2010, 11:10
Gee, I would like to see the reaction of some of the pilots I worked with when they got a pat on the gonads. Probably result in a smack in the mouth to the patter, I suggest. I mean would not this job attract people with shall we say, strange tendencies, and as a father of both male and female pilots, I have rather strong feelings, especially about my daughter, being touched by perhaps some strange woman, with rather odd, um, ideas. My daughter being a happy healthy young hetrosexual female, is somewhat concerned about just how far they go, and by whom. It is enough for most of us being prodded and poked by the local quack, but in a airport??????? Before a flight?????? When you then have to work???? I cannot even imagine the conversation on the flight deck, after it all settles down.....God, I am glad I flew when I did!:*

12th Nov 2010, 11:25
More news:

Man 'beat colleague over small penis taunts' | News.com.au (http://www.news.com.au/travel/news/man-beat-colleague-over-small-penis-taunts/story-e6frfq80-1225863407374)

Yeah these guys are clearly mentally stable and mature enough to be screening anyone. Perhaps a requirement of a minimum of primary school education could be implemented.

Jo Margetson to sue over 'naked scanner ogling' | News.com.au (http://www.news.com.au/jo-margetson-to-sue-over-naked-scanner-ogling/story-e6frg3tu-1225845851700?from=public_rss%20)

First cab off the rank, something tells me the rank could be similar in length to the one at ML.

Child porn fears over 'naked' airport scanner | News.com.au (http://www.news.com.au/travel/news/child-porn-fears-over-naked-airport-scanner/story-e6frfq80-1225787550661)

Given its not acceptable to film your own kids performances at some schools while they're FULLY CLOTHED how was this EVER going to be acceptable?

I'm not sure which one I want to be forcefully subjected too. Which one will give me a higher compensation when I sue?

12th Nov 2010, 11:46
"Sir I think its your shoes............
"No it is not, it's your stupid machine "

"Take your shoes off"

"Whats in your bag"
"The same $%%^ I had yesterday" ( you moron)

"Have you had a trace test done before"
"Yes, yesterday, and every day before that when you personally stopped me at this time - EVERYDAY" ( you idiot)

"I will have to take this - (tiny tweesers, deoderant, water, off you)
"No dramas, I am about to strap myself onto a 50 - 400 ton flying missile - jam packed with between 5 and 120 tons of volatile jet fuel, conveniently coloured for easy recognition - but go right ahead - HELL strip me naked for all I care"

"I have an ASIC if that makes difference "???
"No sir it does not, you will be subjected to the rubber glove like all the other passengers, in a RANDOM fashion, even if we have to chase you down across the airport - "Sorry sir, just a RANDOM check " uhhhhh ok, why are you panting fatty ???

X rays - everyday - Sorry Anthony - How does GF sound?

Synchs on - Water is OFFFFFF

12th Nov 2010, 13:59
I'm no legal eagle but I was always under the assumption that only sworn members of the public were able to do full frisk searches if there was reasonable just cause. These security staff are, as far as I'm aware, not sworn in and probably wouldn't understand what it meant anyway.

12th Nov 2010, 14:43
It'll be a cold day in hell before I go through these things on a regular basis. As SLF, I fly domestically once every 10 days in average. And its' got me buggered why Sydney tells me my deodorant cans must go through seperately, but Karratha doesn't.

Then again, this was the same mob that sent two flight's worth of passengers through the metal detector before realising that it was still turned off at the wall.:mad:

Bring on the RV and the ability to fly myself.:}

Mr. Hat
12th Nov 2010, 21:50
You make a good point about the PM Wally. Indeed what will happen with celebrities whose nude image might be worth alot of money in the media or on the internet.

I'm sure the likes Jennifer Hawkins or Miranda Kerr would be concerned about it.

Worrals in the wilds
12th Nov 2010, 23:22
There are two differences between this crap and existing provisions for strip searching;
1. Existing strip search legislation only allows for government law enforcement officers to conduct searches, not fly by night contactors who work for the cheapest provider,

2. It only applies when said officer has reasonable grounds to suspect you have done something WRONG. Even if they are mistaken and don't find anything (as they often are) at some stage they had to have a reason for the search and they have to be prepared to defend those reasons to a justice or court if required (Prison access may be an exception, I'm not familiar with their procedures).

At the moment relatively few people are strip searched in Australa and they were all suspected of doing something wrong, unlike this set up where ordinary pax and staff are subjected to a gross infringement of their personal liberties for no reason whatsoever.

By the Aviation Transport Security Act the AFP and state coppers already have the power to strip search people with reasonable grounds if they believe they constitute a threat to aviation safety. Surely they can apply that process to the relatively few Persons of Interest who go through screening points without subjecting the rest of us to sexual assault? As far as I'm aware they rarely, if ever have to use that legislation at the moment, so why are we jumping from A to Z with this stuff? Just because the Yanks are? :ugh::mad:

Horatio Leafblower
13th Nov 2010, 06:05
Worrals, the fact that you refuse to go through this perfectly safe X-Ray machine is prima facie evidence that you have something to hide. That's a reasonable ause for suspicion I suspect. :rolleyes:

I know at least one airline will be meeting on this in the next week and there is at least one airline's Safety & Compliance manager dead against it :*

13th Nov 2010, 07:53
and how the heck are they going to process people with mobility problems through the clark-kent machines ?
I told you to stand up straight and put your hands in the air., I don't care if you have arthritis and your prosthesis is still being scrutinised by fred over there.
Dammit.., don't you know that this is for your safety?

If the pollies really want it then they must agree to submit to the same processes that they inflict on the rest of us.
No 'special' treatment or side-doors for them.

Now the TSA wants us to remove our belts.
Airport security reaches new levels of absurdity - Ask the Pilot - Salon.com (http://www.salon.com/technology/ask_the_pilot/2010/11/04/belt_removal_at_security_checkpoint/index.html)

effing bs security theatre.

Senior Pilot
13th Nov 2010, 09:55


13th Nov 2010, 11:27
YouTube - Nude Protest: Airport Body Scanners in Germany (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZSEf_4F3jk&feature=player_embedded)
This is the way to go.
Personally I am going to use it as a an excuse to be felt up at work without any of those pesky complaints. :E:ok::}

Al Fentanyl
14th Nov 2010, 01:08
So refuse. What are they going to do? If you ALL refuse, every time, to be xrayed or groped, there will be a bunch of aeroplanes sitting idle on the tarmac with a heap of paying customers putting more pressure on Goverment than any pilot group could.

Damn sure I won't tolerate either procedure on me or mine.

Air travel is most oftem elective, so if hordes of no-longer-paying ex-passengers elect NOT to be subjected to either procedure and therefore do not fly, there will be a bunch of aeroplanes sitting idle on the tarmac with a heap of tax-paying airline companies putting more pressure on Goverment than any pilot group could.

An absolute promise of the above action would absolutely ensure that the government would choose NOT to introduce this nonsense here.

Helmut Smokar
14th Nov 2010, 02:33
Just refuse to go through the scanner and take the 'feel up'. If the feel up is overly obtrusive let the nice security officer know he has stepped over the line. If he continues ask for the supervisor and file a complaint against the Security officer, the good thing is that you also have video evidence thanks to the screening point CCTV.

Seriously if we all just refuse to continue the sham that is screening of flight crew, what are they going to do. Union Directives would be nice as it is now OHS based not industrial.:cool:

14th Nov 2010, 04:00
Helmut just touched on a point I was going to make. Has the time come for pilots to look at setting up a professional organisation that has the scope to fight or influence matters like this? It would need to represent pilots in a non industrial manner in order to delineate between employer based grievances and legislative issues. Doctors have them, lawyers have them and I am sure many other professions have them. I know at times we seem to struggle to speak with a unified voice when it comes to industrial matters but I wonder if it may be easier when you remove the employer bias. I sometimes think we might get taken a bit more seriously if it were not a union leading the fight on government policy matters and the like.
For all I know it may have been tried and then put in the too hard basket but if so maybe it's worth another look.

As to the scan, I will not be subjecting myself to it. The pat down is the lesser of the two evils in this case. If there is enough of a groundswell against the scanners then changes will need to be made. Hopefully that change is not removing the pat down option!

14th Nov 2010, 09:06
below MDA...

One organisation that represents airline PASSENGERS in the US is starting to make some noise about this proposal in terms of personal safety AND privacy concerns.

From International Airline Passengers Association (see):


Body scanners are popping up at airports throughout the United States and around the world, yet the debate lingers as to whether the devices have been tested enough to guarantee their safety and effectiveness. As security agencies feel their way through the implementation process and passengers who refuse the scans literally feel their way through uncomfortable pat-downs, the future still seems a bit blurry for the otherwise all-too-revealing scanners, and that might be just fine for privacy advocates.

The full-body scanner controversy revolves around two key issues – their safety and their revealing pictures. The devices use either x-ray-based backscatter technology or electromagnetic wave technology. Each type of device produces a revealing image that can see through clothes, and then some. The backscatter devices bounce low-level x-rays to produce the images. Though agencies like the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) insist that the machines have been tested and are safe, there is still debate over the cumulative effects of such radiation. Also at issue are the effects on pregnant women and those with compromised immune systems. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) cites tests that show that it would take over a thousand screenings per year to reach recommended limits for such exposure. Critics show little confidence in the FDA's findings since a New York Times article revealed that members of the machine manufacturers and the government agencies tasked with overseeing security developed the standards for x-ray scanners.1

IAPA is concerned with the cumulative effects of the scanning devices on frequent flyers and crew members who are most likely to approach that "thousand scans per year" threshold. Though the Association generally supports the use of multiple screening methods, including scanning devices, there has to be conclusive proof of the efficacy and safety of all technology in use. We may not be there yet.

IAPA contacted the Coalition of Airline Pilots Associations (CAPA) about pilots' concerns over the frequent use of body scanners. According to Bill Cason, Director of Security for CAPA, "crewmembers are not required to be scanned (nor is any passenger) and other options, such as pat-downs, are available. We have expressed our concern with both privacy issues and more importantly, the safety of the scanners, which we believe have not been adequately demonstrated. While we understand that the general dose of radiation per exposure is very low, airline crewmembers [transit] screening areas far more often than the average passenger, and we are not satisfied with the data at this time." Corey Caldwell, of the Association of Flight Attendants (AFA-CWA) offers a similar sentiment. "AFA-CWA does have concerns and feels that the scanners still need to be fully tested to ensure effectiveness. According to our interpretation, TSA allows passengers the option of being patted down and we expect that flight crew will get the same option," said Caldwell. With a new "enhanced" pat-down procedure that involves a more intimate approach, that may be a safer choice in the minds of some, but it probably won't be any more comfortable.

Regarding privacy, security agencies insist that part of the protocol for the use of the scanners is to locate the person viewing the images in a separate room, away from the scanner. Additionally, the face and other identifying features of the individual being scanned is blurred to protect his or her privacy. There is still concern, however, that the revealing images can be stored and shared, despite claims by the TSA that the "save image" feature of the machines has been disabled. The mere fact that it's possible to store an image has privacy advocates alarmed. Yet, a compromise may come in the form of an avatar – a replacement image for the human being scanned. Software is being tested by some machine makers that would replace the picture of a person with a cartoon-like representation that will still reveal any suspicious item located underneath clothing. This might give comfort to some travelers, but for others, the whole process seems more like a cartoon than reality. What are your thoughts?

New York Times -- Are Scanners Worth the Risk, by Susan Stellin

Seems to reflect my sentiments from post #33:

Seriously, a proposal to introduce this madness into the Australian aviation system is idiocy in the extreme, and it's time the government IS told loud and clear by the electorate, enough's enough, and:


The Minister for Mascot needs to take his hand off it, wake up to himself RFN, and to actually start THINKING about the fact that if you fcuk SLF around enough, they'll seek alternatives to the present stupidity of domestic Aviation Security Inspection Circus (ASIC) if it worsens as seems proposed. :ugh:

15th Nov 2010, 00:52
I found a comment on a tech website that does help provide some perspective:

[H]ow far are we willing to go to prevent weapons or bombs from getting on airplanes? In the past decade, terrorists on airplanes have killed just about 3,000 people — all on one day. Even if the Christmas Day bomber had succeeded, the number would be under 3,500. Those are horrible deaths. But in that same period, more than 150,000 people have been murdered in the United States. We haven't put the entire U.S. on lockdown — or even murder capitals like Detroit, New Orleans and Baltimore

Indeed! Can you imagine the shitstorm that would descend upon us all if the United States government locked down the country because of a few murders? Pandemonium!

TSA Full-Body Scanners: Protecting Passengers or Padding Pockets? (http://gizmodo.com/5689759/tsa-full+body-scanners-protecting-passengers-or-padding-pockets)

15th Nov 2010, 03:27
The US insist that all this happens for international flights but most of those attempts have been on domestic flights.

Hey US - take some of your own medicine and screen/touch/feel your own passengers on your domestic routes!!!!!

15th Nov 2010, 04:55
I like the comment above that states that scanned images are not kept! What rubbish!! Images ARE stored, so as to be used for possible future evidence, just in case a dubious person was not picked up, but later on threatened a flight. Any technology can be corrupted, such as photo copiers, which can store millions of sensitive documents. See the following link. I know that mechanics, caterers, refuelers, are not scanned, but what about the pilots of rescue helicopters, and light aircraft based on major airports, or for that matter the Police Air Wing!

WARNING! The Scary Truth About Photocopiers and Your Personal Data | TechChunks.com - Latest Technology News Updates (http://techchunks.com/technology/scary-truth-about-photocopiers-and-your-sensitive-data/)

15th Nov 2010, 08:54
I know that mechanics, caterers, refuelers, are not scanned, but what about the pilots of rescue helicopters, and light aircraft based on major airports, or for that matter the Police Air Wing! Only where their aircraft departs off the same apron as a screened RPT aircraft during the operational period. This might become more problematic when the 20,000 MTOW limit is introduced in 2012.

16th Nov 2010, 00:28
O/k, let's take freight aircraft scattered around the country, parked at every capital city airport. Crew access to those aircraft is often through the hanger, walking acrooss the tarmac direct to the aircraft, and these aircraft may be as large as a B737 or a BAE146. I have personally witnessed the crew for the Prime Ministers aircraft being escorted to the aircraft, through perimeter gates, by the airport safety car. My point is that just because I fly a large airline aircraft, during "normal" hours, I am subjected to numerous security screenings, when many others are not!

16th Nov 2010, 00:30
It'd be funny if it wasn't so ridiculous...


16th Nov 2010, 05:09
AussieAviatior, the reason for the anomaly is in a very simple part of the regulations which currently prescribe that only aircraft above 30,000kg MTOW carrying out RPT operations require to be screened.

This is being expanded to all aircraft of 20,000 MTOW and above from 2012. Charter and other non- RPT operations are being looked at to be included in this but nothing has been decided yet.

As for the PMs aircraft, military aircraft are classifed as "state aircraft" and exempt from screening requirements.

Mahatma Kote
16th Nov 2010, 05:46
Viagra and touching the searcher on their shoulder while they are groping - accompanied by erotic moaning - should reduce most of them to quivering wrecks.

Warning them beforehand that you are sexually aroused by them will make it even less pleasant for them.

16th Nov 2010, 05:52
A guy in the US refuses to get sexually assaulted during a TSA pat-down after refusing to go through the body scanner.

At 08:32 : TSA Officer : " By buying your ticket, you gave up alot of your rights'http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/yeees.gif

It's a bit slow, but worth listening to... especially at the end when he's trying to leave the airport, and one of the TSA want his phone details to help 'mitigate issues' when they 'bring the case against him'.

The guys final words on the video " You bring that case":D:D:D:D

Here's a link to the video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-UqM56e-kRA (http://www.abc.net.au/news/video/youtube.htm?v=7txGwoITSj4)

ABC News story:
'Don't touch my junk' airport clip goes viral

By Washington correspondent Craig McMurtrie (http://www.abc.net.au/news/people/craigmcmurtrie/?site=news)
Updated 2 hours 31 minutes ago
http://www.abc.net.au/reslib/201002/r511787_2772448.jpg (http://www.abc.net.au/reslib/201002/r511787_2772453.jpg) Body scanners have been subject to opposition on privacy and health grounds. (file photo) (AFP: David Hecker)

Video: Internet video sparks debate over airport security (The Midday Report) (http://www.abc.net.au/reslib/201011/r673990_4927000.asx)
Audio: US airport security confrontation leads to web sensation (AM) (http://mpegmedia.abc.net.au/news/audio/am/201011/20101116-AM6-airportsecurity.mp3)
Related Link: Watch the 'don't touch my junk' video on YouTube (http://www.abc.net.au/news/video/youtube.htm?v=7txGwoITSj4)
A video of an American software engineer arguing with airport security personnel over new, rigorous, pat-down rules has become the latest internet sensation.
The man agreed to go through normal metal detectors at San Diego airport but refused to submit to one of the new full-body scans.
He says he was threatened by security guards as a result.
His mobile phone footage of the incident - dubbed 'Don't touch my junk' - has become a web sensation.
John Tyner, 31, left his mobile phone recording video and sound as he pulled off his shoes and as his carry-on items were screened at airport security.
He was pulled out of the line for the standard metal detector and was asked instead to go through one of the newly installed body scanners, called Advanced Imagery Technology units or AITs.
His phone was still recording as he refused on privacy and health grounds and was instead sent for one of the new pat-downs.
"We're going to be doing a groin check. That means I'm going to place my hand on your hip, my other hand on your inner thigh, slowly go up, and slide down," a security worker says in the clip.
"We are going to do that two times in the front and two times in the back.
"And if you'd like a private screening, we can make that available for you also."
Mr Tyner responded: "We can do that out here, but if you touch my junk, I'm going to have you arrested."
A supervisor was then called, who said: "If you're not comfortable with that we can escort you back out and you don't have to fly today."
"OK, I don't understand how a sexual assault be made a condition of me flying," Mr Tyner said.
In the end Mr Tyner's ticket is refunded and he leaves but not before being confronted by security officials.
He says one of the security officials told him he could face charges and a fine of $10,000.
"I would like to leave now. If I'm free to go I would like to leave," Mr Tyner said.
"All I'm trying to do is get you to cooperate," the security guard said.
"It would look better for you when we bring the case against you that we are going to bring ... that you cooperated."
Mr Tyner says his video was not a set up and he will not be flying again anytime soon.
Hundreds of the full-body scanners are being installed around US airports.
America's Transport and Security Administration says all passengers must be screened and the new measures are a response, in part, to the notorious underwear bomber incident on a flight to Detroit last Christmas.
"They in no way [are] electronic strip searches," homeland security secretary Janet Napolitano said.
"All they do is ping in a private area, away from the gate, with an image that is neither retained nor transmitted."
With the busy holiday season approaching, the Airline Pilots Association has voiced its concern about the pat-downs and tourism groups are reporting an increase in traveller complaints.
"We have an open ear, we will listen - it's all about everybody recognising their role," Ms Napolitano said.
US transport officials point to surveys showing a majority of passengers approve of the new procedures.

16th Nov 2010, 06:15
F%$# it! Just go thru naked and pretend it is normal procedure. If the opposite sex security dude claims to be offended just laugh in their face.
Good thing America and Australia are not police states imagine what it would be like if we were.

16th Nov 2010, 07:19
My wife spent many years in charge of a large hospital X-Ray dept.
The 25kv equipment is very similar to that used for the early mammography procedures.

Having seen the scanning operation, her reaction was somewhat different.
Any hospital dept. that operated in that way would be immediately closed down by radiation protection.

Not for the subjects - for the staff.

You may only receive a few scans a month - the staff working nearby are receiving radiation continually. At the very least, they should be monitored, be wearing lead aprons and have duty times severely restricted.

Perhaps this nonsense might end when TSA agents realise the personal consequences.

Mahatma Kote
16th Nov 2010, 07:55
As a further option, declare loud and long that the feeler is obviously sexually aroused.

Refuse to be examined unless a third party has certified the feeler is not sexually aroused.

16th Nov 2010, 09:59
i quote again, the editorial by PERRY FLINT, from ATW magazine, in JAN 10


Nothing better demonstrates al-Qaeda's total grasp of the reality of aviation security in a post-modern culture than the fact that the world's deadliest and most sophisticated terrorist organization did not even bother to have Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab purchase a roundtrip ticket or check a bag or two of old socks and underwear to allay any possible suspicions that he was on a one-way trip to paradise when he boarded his KLM flight in Lagos last month.

Unless you've been hiding out in a cave along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border for the last nine years, you know that no baggage and a one-way ticket are a dead giveaway to security people that you are up to no good. But why bother with the smoke and mirrors, al-Qaeda probably reasoned, when Western security apparatuses have made it clear they will bend over backwards to avoid giving the appearance that they are engaging in religious or ethnic profiling in targeting suspicious travelers for extra attention?

For everyone else, however, the question has to be asked: What have the last eight years been about? What was the point of all that hassle at security? Since Richard Reid's failed attempt to do the same thing as Abdulmutallab in December 2001, a few billion people have taken off their shoes andsince 2006stopped putting gels and liquids in their carry-on bags (except for clearly marked 3-oz. containers in those specially designed 1-liter clear plastic bags). Yet Abdulmutallab was able to buy a ticket and waltz through airports with nary a second glance despite having a terrorist profile that would have alerted Frank Drebin's Police Squad, Maxwell Smart and Inspector Clouseau.

We give credit to President Barack Obama for quickly acknowledging that the US intelligence agencies "failed to connect the dots" that would have exposed the plot. Understanding how the same organizations will do any better the next time is difficult, however, given a mindset among officials in counter-terrorism agencies and the State Dept. that is predisposed to place the most benign interpretation possible on activities that should arouse suspicion and that follows an "innocent until proven guilty" approach to issuing visas. President Obama has described the collapse as a "systemic failure across organizations and agencies," but when everyone is responsible then no one is responsible.

The President has said that he is not interested in "passing out blame" to those in the intelligence chain who failed, making it unlikely any heads will roll, but it's also clear that air travelers and airlines are going to be the ones who get punished with the loss of even more dignity and extra hassle. The administration is committing to buying hundreds of expensive body-scanning devices that reveal a passenger under his or her clothing. It is pressing other governments to do the same, even though in many cases use of the machines will violate their privacy regulations and laws.

In addition to the assault on privacy, there is a matter of throughput efficiency and cost. The machines take 40-60 sec. to do their job, which will slow the already tedious security process to a crawl, particularly as we can assume that all the other screening layers will remain in place. In the US at least, it is likely that airlines and passengers will be asked to pay for them with higher security fees.

They will pay a price in another way. Rather than undergoing this invasive process, some percentage of consumers will stop flying. If airport avoidance was previously a factor for travel distances of up to 250 mi., this will rise to perhaps 350-400 mi. Forget what the polls say. Many of these people will never admit publicly that they have "hang-ups" about personal privacy or that they have misgivings about a system that treats every passenger like a potential terrorist rather than focusing on the most likely candidates. They have been trained by the PC police to give the correct answers to such sensitive questions. Nonetheless, they will quietly make the decision to drive or skip the trip.

We are glad that the Obama administration is willing to examine why the vast intelligence edifice erected after 9/11 failed; we only wish it were willing to take a closer look at the assumptions that guide the security policies set in place by his predecessor and copied around the world. Refusing to use advanced profiling techniques and looking for bombs instead of bombers have transformed every airport into a haystack. Unfortunately, on Dec. 25 no one found the needle

NOT using profiling for fear of being labelled RACIST!!!!

well done, society!!!!

16th Nov 2010, 10:23
That man is a legend..........

It is time to start a war...errr sorry a polite and politically correct publict debate against the stupidity of security in Aviation.

If far more folk did what he did we would eventually see a result.

16th Nov 2010, 11:34
Western security apparatuses have made it clear they will bend over backwards to avoid giving the appearance that they are engaging in religious or ethnic profiling in targeting suspicious travelers for extra attention?

says it all really!

17th Nov 2010, 00:40
To expand on breakfastburrito's comments (post #20) (http://www.pprune.org/dg-p-reporting-points/433423-body-scanners-will-you-go-genital-feel-up-nude-photos-cancer.html#post6055272)- airline crew (flight or cabin) ought to be considering all their radiation exposure. They are already receiving large occupational doses. Other radiation workers are taught to manage their overall doses. For example a medical X-ray might make them ineligible for some work. Airline/aircraft crew ought to do the same. If I were in that category, I would be tracking and logging my exposure and any medical or other exposures.

Any exposure carries risks but the risk increase isn't linear and the additional exposure from scanners poses a greater risk to those who have other radiation exposure. I would suggest that any additional exposure for any crew is unwise.

For the rest of us, it appears that the data on these scanners is unclear. The energy of the dose is known but there appears to be little information on what parts of the body actually absorb that energy. The energy might be small but if that energy is being absorbed by only a fraction of the body, it might be quite significant. Let me give an example. Put a piece of paper in the sun and watch it. Nothing much happens except perhaps it gets a little hot. The whole piece can absorb that heat from the sun at that concentration. Now get a magnifying glass and focus some of that same amount of heat and light into one spot. The paper burns. The whole piece of paper was in total receiving the same total of light and heat. (Actually less due to losses from the magnifying glass.) However one part of it was receiving a lot more (and other parts a lot less) and it suffered damage.

What I'm wondering is where are the health physics professionals in this? This is their field but I've found nothing from them. I suspect independent review has been muffled and silenced by the secrecy surrounding the devices.

17th Nov 2010, 01:46
Are these machines set at a "strength" level or is it variable. My thoughts are that these operators are not professional medical people and I would not like to think they would have the ability to wind it up to what they think is needed.

17th Nov 2010, 02:26
It looks as tho TSA may have stuffed up with there choice of pat down applicants.
'Mommy blogger' Erin Chase likens enhanced pat down to sex assault (http://www.smh.com.au/travel/travel-news/angry-mommy-blogger-likens-enhanced-patdown-search-to-sex-assault-20101117-17whz.html#poll)

VH-Cheer Up
17th Nov 2010, 04:48
Interesting article about Body scanners have 'mutagenic effects' - Security - News (http://www.zdnet.com.au/body-scanners-have-mutagenic-effects-339307191.htm?omnRef=NULL) the "safety" of x-ray full body scanners, and the digital (fingers do the walking) alternative.

17th Nov 2010, 06:29
Is "junk" an American term for meat and two vegs.

17th Nov 2010, 06:51
Its quite simple. When the aviation minister and his entire family demonstrate a full years worth each and every year of what they are considering requiring crew to do for NO SAFETY benefit, then I will consider it.

That correct Mr Albenese, you and your entire family have 200 scans this year & next year and every year. Please demonstrate its long term safety, using your family as guinea pigs.

It won't happen of course...

17th Nov 2010, 07:40
If you have no choice but to go through one of these then maybe plant a seed with the TSA or whomever the operators are about the radiation [I]they[I] are receiving as mentioned by Bills. Maybe if there is a revolt by the operators as well then it might be another nail in the coffin of these scanners

17th Nov 2010, 08:06
Only 45 more ppruners and the headline will be

'eight out of ten Australian Aircrew reject whole body scanners'................

..............btw: The Minister for Mascot is so out of touch he wouldn't know what's going on

Mr. Hat
17th Nov 2010, 08:22

Very good value indeed. Gave me a good laugh.

On a more serious note I read the Erin Chase article: Airport pat-down was 'sexual assault' | News.com.au (http://www.news.com.au/travel/news/airport-pat-down-was-sexual-assault/story-e6frfq80-1225955026206)

I have to say that this whole thing is very very strange indeed if you think about what is actually taking place. There are going to be some serious injuries at airports if this keeps happening in this unexpected manner.

I have the following question without the gory details. But what do the security people propose when a female passenger wearing a "sanitary item" gets the new pat down? What about toddlers with nappies?

17th Nov 2010, 08:35
What apache said at post#70. :D :D

From the link provided by rmcdonal at 'Mommy blogger' Erin Chase likens enhanced pat down to sex assault (http://www.smh.com.au/travel/travel-news/angry-mommy-blogger-likens-enhanced-patdown-search-to-sex-assault-20101117-17whz.html#poll)

Have [airport] security searches gone too far?

Yes = 84%
No = 16%

From PPrUnNE:

Would you willingly submit to full body scanning, should it be introduced?

No = 83%
Yes and Undecided = 17%

Interesting correlation!

I admire Erin Chase's style:

"I intend to request the TSA to arrange for counselling services to be provided to me, so I can deal with the aftermath of the sexual assault that took place."

:D :D

I also admire John Tyner's style:

Tyner refused a full-body scan, a procedure that reveals an image of what's under a passenger's clothes. He also wouldn't allow a TSA screener to conduct a groin check.

:D :D

Those two examples are definitely going to end in tears for the responsible bureaucrats in the US I'd say.

Airport security is already a farcical nightmare here in Australia, without making it worse as seems proposed.

Hopefully it will go the same way here as in the US if the Minister for Mascot and his bureaucrats persist with the notion that it's necessary to introduce this unwarranted airport security procedural 'overkill' here, instead of the engaging in religious or ethnic profiling to target suspicious travelers for extra attention. IDIOTS! :mad: :mad:


btw: The Minister for Mascot is so out of touch he wouldn't know what's going on

If the bastard was subjected to a government airport security-sanctioned 'touch-up', ie the 'Christmas Grip' (a handfull of nuts), that'll wake him up soon enough. :ugh: :ugh:

Josh Cox
17th Nov 2010, 08:39
WTF ? :YouTube - TSA Pat-Down of a 3 Year Old (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VN6pJ7nP1yA)

Max Talk
17th Nov 2010, 08:51
Hey. Are you allowed to go back for a second touch up if you are not satisfied ?:cool:

17th Nov 2010, 09:07
They are doing it all wrong.

The answwer is simple, get smoking hot naked girls to pat down the male passengers and smoking hot men for the girls. If your gay, join the other line up.
The terrorists will not be able to take all the naked girls and will go away.

Problem solved.

The Chinese think this whole thing is funny.

YouTube - TSA's enhanced security spurs US 'airport rage' (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TBL3ux1o0tM)

psycho joe
17th Nov 2010, 13:44
In the interests of safety I think it only fitting that as Aircrew I should be allowed to conduct my own 'enhanced pat down' on randomly selected individuals as they walk down the aerobridge.


Patent Pending.

17th Nov 2010, 17:06
Josh cox...

That video is f$&@Ed up... I hope that kid grows up to be a lawyer...

compressor stall
17th Nov 2010, 21:00
Images saved and accessible later...

At the heart of the controversy over “body scanners” is a promise: The images of our naked bodies will never be public. U.S. Marshals in a Florida Federal courthouse saved 35,000 images on their scanner. These are those images.

A Gizmodo investigation has revealed 100 of the photographs saved by the Gen 2 millimeter wave scanner from Brijot Imaging Systems, Inc., obtained by a FOIA request after it was recently revealed that U.S. Marshals operating the machine in the Orlando, Florida, courthouse had improperly — perhaps illegally — saved images of the scans of public servants and private citizens.

We understand that it will be controversial to release these photographs. But identifying features have been eliminated. And fortunately for those who walked through the scanner in Florida last year, this mismanaged machine used the less embarrassing imaging technique.

Yet the leaking of these photographs demonstrates the security limitations of not just this particular machine, but millimeter wave and X-ray backscatter body scanners operated by federal employees in our courthouses and by TSA officers in airports across the country. That we can see these images today almost guarantees that others will be seeing similar images in the future. If you’re lucky, it might even be a picture of you or your family.

100 Naked Citizens: 100 Leaked Body Scans | Threat Level | Wired.com (http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/11/giz-scans/)

18th Nov 2010, 02:43
No to the x-ray and then when they pawn me I'll report sick to work after physically being violated.

I have just flown the plane yesterday and will continue to fly the plane tomorrow as I have done for the past 15 years. I don't need to be groped to achieve this.

Mr. Hat
18th Nov 2010, 02:46
At this rate the high speed rail will wipe the floor with the domestic aviation industry if it ever gains legs.

Airport staff 'exposed woman's breasts, laughed' | News.com.au (http://www.news.com.au/travel/news/airport-staff-exposed-womans-breasts-laughed/story-e6frfq80-1225955345734)

18th Nov 2010, 03:41
I'll be taking the grope fest over the x ray any day. Though as a male, I'll be asking for a female groper and add a bit of thrusting for good measure.

18th Nov 2010, 04:16
as i posted elsewhere, what would security staff do if they go the full frisk and you had a banana (large) stuffed down the undies? maybe a male descendant of john holmes going commando through security?
close down the airport!!

18th Nov 2010, 05:38
Excellent article in today's SMH by John Birmingham:

Government-mandated groping: the growing indignity of air travel (http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/opinion/blogs/blunt-instrument/governmentmandated-groping-the-growing-indignity-of-air-travel/20101117-17x9y.html) :yuk::yuk::yuk:

And how the Isrealies do real security:
The 'Israelification' of airports: High security, little bother - thestar.com (http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/744199---israelification-high-security-little-bother) :D:D:D

Worrals in the wilds
18th Nov 2010, 08:13
Neither legal nor an eagle :}, but in the absence of more learned opinions...the rights and obligations of persons passing through a screening point, along with the actual screening procedures are specified by the Aviation Transport Security Act (Parts 4 and 5) and its Regulations (Part 4), as per the links below.

Like most Commonwealth legislation of this sort it's reasonably straight forward reading and does what it says on the tin. It's not like tort or common law where precedent applies, everything gets interpretive and it turns into Silks at ten paces.

ComLaw Act Compilations - Aviation Transport Security Act 2004 (8) (http://www.comlaw.gov.au/ComLaw/Legislation/ActCompilation1.nsf/0/70D16F42D3DA46FDCA25779C007AF35D?OpenDocument)

ComLaw Legislative Instrument Compilations - Aviation Transport Security Regulations 2005 (SLI 2005 No. 18) (http://www.comlaw.gov.au/comlaw/Legislation/LegislativeInstrumentCompilation1.nsf/0/449301F8B159596ACA2576A1001E2F43?OpenDocument)

Basic 'rights' are covered by the Crimes Act 1914, such as periods of detention, arrests, right to silence etc. These apply to people dealing with Commonwealth officers, not contract security guards (say you get detained by the AFP). It's a more complex read but IMHO every Australian should be broadly familiar with its contents.

ComLaw Act Compilations - Crimes Act 1914 (12) (http://scaleplus.law.gov.au/comlaw/Legislation/ActCompilation1.nsf/0/C6F43237B8EB8CCECA2577C900802707?OpenDocument)

Mr. Hat
18th Nov 2010, 08:23
I think it comes down to - you bought a ticket this is what you agreed to. Its in the fine print. As for employees however it will be more interesting. Nowhere in my contract does it say I'll be fondled in the worklace or subject to radiation....

Capt Claret
18th Nov 2010, 08:50
In my opinion, the only way for crew, worldwide, to avoid this travesty, is to refuse to partake in the practice.

I wish I were 10 or 15 years older and in a position to retire. :{

Worrals in the wilds
18th Nov 2010, 08:58
I think it comes down to - you bought a ticket this is what you agreed to. Its in the fine print.

Not really. Screening procedures are dictated by the government and its legislation, not the carriers. The problem you/we face as employees is that we are obliged to enter the sterile area for work, and the legislation above lists certain requirements for entry.

It's the Commonwealth government that instigates this stuff and the Commonwealth government that has to be fought if you want to oppose it. I'm not saying Captain Claret's approach is wrong (far from it) but the Office of Infrastructure or WTF they're called this week are the people to target. Given that all the airlines pay for this stuff (and it will cause delays and complaints) I can't imagine they're any more in favour of it than we are.

18th Nov 2010, 09:00
I will insist on a physical search. I will ask to see the written material detailing how the test will be carried out. I will take my time to read that material and ask inane questions about the procedure and I will ask to speak to a supervisor if for no other reason, to p1ss the whole outfit off. If everyone demands the physical search, the system will very soon become clogged.

teresa green
18th Nov 2010, 11:28
Oh, for the good ol times when anyone attempting to feel your gonads got a smack in the mouth. My daughter, QF S/O is freaking out, her brothers, JQ skipper, and QF skipper, have told her that the retired armed forces medical people are doing the feel. Both have mostaches, both male and female, They are winding her up of course, (I hope) but can you imagine the feelings of both female tech and cabin crew. This is freckin crazy, when has a crew ever bombed a aircraft. Yes, the SQ skipper, committed suicide, and took all with him, but all you have to do is use the crash axe to take out the rest of the crew. Nuts.:ugh:

18th Nov 2010, 11:50
What about doing the tuckback?
Be it the scanner or the grope, its going to be awkward for the person doing the checking....


Angle of Attack
18th Nov 2010, 11:52
Meanwhile I got a lot of abusive PM's a couple of months ago about me asking about the right for me to refuse the explosive tests. How quickly it turns, I absolutely refuse all these extra tests and have succesfully the last 2 years. These full body scanners are an absolute disaster for my radiation footprint. I just left and went to the next airlines screening to avoid the bomb tests I will refuse all full body scans with a vengeance! We can win it we dont pussy foot arount, no pilots no planes move!
Think about it just do it its not hard you fools

18th Nov 2010, 14:54
Re Crews refusing the screening.....

From today's AVweb;

Leaders of two unions representing pilots at US Airways and American Airlines have advised their members to decline to be screened by new advanced-imaging-technology full-body scanners and request a pat-down instead. "No pilot at American Airlines should subject themselves to the needless privacy invasion and potential health risks caused by the AIT body scanners," wrote Dave Bates, president of the Allied Pilots Association, which represents 11,000 pilots at American, in a letter to members. The new scanners produce ionizing radiation, which can be harmful to health, especially when added to the high doses of radiation that pilots already are exposed to on the job, Bates said. Mike Cleary, president of the US Airways pilot group, said the TSA procedures are "blatantly unacceptable," and the alternative pat-down procedure also has problems. Cleary said the pat-down process "has already produced a sexual molestation in alarmingly short order." More...

So, if ya'all get together and all do the same thing....:D

Where IS your UNION..??:ugh:


Capt Claret
18th Nov 2010, 18:11
I think, as a blue blooded bloke, one would need a Bex & a good sit (lie) down after the pat down prior to performing any safety related duties. Might easily miss something important if one's blood pressure's through the roof after being groped by some security nazi! :=

Mr. Hat
18th Nov 2010, 19:36
Screening procedures are dictated by the government and its legislation, not the carriers.

Sounds like its time for us to speak to Senator Xenophon. He stood up for us on the jump seat policy. He uses a common sense approach and my point will be "prove to me that screening a fraction of airport workers makes the industry safer".

No way will i undergo radiation therapy. They can play with my balls all day long.

Jock p
18th Nov 2010, 20:48
Buy a T shirt :D

TSA if you don't let us TOUCH YOUR BOOBS we'll by punkpatriot (http://tiny.cc/be38z)

Jock p
18th Nov 2010, 20:55
Biometrics on their way?

NationalJournal.com - TSA, Pilots Weigh Biometric System for Airport Screening - Wednesday, November 17, 2010 (http://tinyurl.com/2brmeb6)

18th Nov 2010, 21:01

Jock p
18th Nov 2010, 21:04
Ron Paul is onto it:D

YouTube - Ron Paul Responds to TSA: Introduces 'American Traveler Dignity Act' (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qwsdq69AHnw)

19th Nov 2010, 00:12
As usual, there are often other ways of doing things. Please read the following.

The 'Israelification' of airports: High security, little bother

Published On Wed Dec 30 2009
Email (http://www.pprune.org/email/744199)
Print (http://www.pprune.org/printarticle/744199)

Share22K (http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thestar.com%2Fnews%2Fworld%2Fa rticle%2F744199---israelification-high-security-little-bother&t=The%20'Israelification'%20of%20airports%3A%20High%20securi ty%2C%20little%20bother%20-%20thestar.com&src=sp) Rss (http://www.pprune.org/rss?categories=news)

Article (http://www.pprune.org/#article)
Comments (63) (http://www.pprune.org/#comments)
Cathal Kelly Staff Reporter

While North America's airports groan under the weight of another sea-change in security protocols, one word keeps popping out of the mouths of experts: Israelification.
That is, how can we make our airports more like Israel's, which deal with far greater terror threat with far less inconvenience.
"It is mindboggling for us Israelis to look at what happens in North America, because we went through this 50 years ago," said Rafi Sela, the president of AR Challenges, a global transportation security consultancy. He's worked with the RCMP, the U.S. Navy Seals and airports around the world.
"Israelis, unlike Canadians and Americans, don't take s--- from anybody. When the security agency in Israel (the ISA) started to tighten security and we had to wait in line for — not for hours — but 30 or 40 minutes, all hell broke loose here. We said, 'We're not going to do this. You're going to find a way that will take care of security without touching the efficiency of the airport."
That, in a nutshell is "Israelification" - a system that protects life and limb without annoying you to death.
Fliers urged to opt out of airport security en masse (http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/892031--fliers-urged-to-opt-out-of-airport-security-en-masse)
Despite facing dozens of potential threats each day, the security set-up at Israel's largest hub, Tel Aviv's Ben Gurion Airport, has not been breached since 2002, when a passenger mistakenly carried a handgun onto a flight. How do they manage that?
"The first thing you do is to look at who is coming into your airport," said Sela.
The first layer of actual security that greets travellers at Tel Aviv's Ben Gurion International Airport is a roadside check. All drivers are stopped and asked two questions: How are you? Where are you coming from?
"Two benign questions. The questions aren't important. The way people act when they answer them is," Sela said.
Officers are looking for nervousness or other signs of "distress" — behavioural profiling. Sela rejects the argument that profiling is discriminatory.
"The word 'profiling' is a political invention by people who don't want to do security," he said. "To us, it doesn't matter if he's black, white, young or old. It's just his behaviour. So what kind of privacy am I really stepping on when I'm doing this?"
Once you've parked your car or gotten off your bus, you pass through the second and third security perimeters.
Armed guards outside the terminal are trained to observe passengers as they move toward the doors, again looking for odd behaviour. At Ben Gurion's half-dozen entrances, another layer of security are watching. At this point, some travellers will be randomly taken aside, and their person and their luggage run through a magnometer.
"This is to see that you don't have heavy metals on you or something that looks suspicious," said Sela.
You are now in the terminal. As you approach your airline check-in desk, a trained interviewer takes your passport and ticket. They ask a series of questions: Who packed your luggage? Has it left your side?
"The whole time, they are looking into your eyes — which is very embarrassing. But this is one of the ways they figure out if you are suspicious or not. It takes 20, 25 seconds," said Sela.
Lines are staggered. People are not allowed to bunch up into inviting targets for a bomber who has gotten this far.
At the check-in desk, your luggage is scanned immediately in a purpose-built area. Sela plays devil's advocate — what if you have escaped the attention of the first four layers of security, and now try to pass a bag with a bomb in it?
"I once put this question to Jacques Duchesneau (the former head of the Canadian Air Transport Security Authority): say there is a bag with play-doh in it and two pens stuck in the play-doh. That is 'Bombs 101' to a screener. I asked Ducheneau, 'What would you do?' And he said, 'Evacuate the terminal.' And I said, 'Oh. My. God.'
"Take Pearson. Do you know how many people are in the terminal at all times? Many thousands. Let's say I'm (doing an evacuation) without panic — which will never happen. But let's say this is the case. How long will it take? Nobody thought about it. I said, 'Two days.'"
A screener at Ben-Gurion has a pair of better options.
First, the screening area is surrounded by contoured, blast-proof glass that can contain the detonation of up to 100 kilos of plastic explosive. Only the few dozen people within the screening area need be removed, and only to a point a few metres away.
Second, all the screening areas contain 'bomb boxes'. If a screener spots a suspect bag, he/she is trained to pick it up and place it in the box, which is blast proof. A bomb squad arrives shortly and wheels the box away for further investigation.
"This is a very small simple example of how we can simply stop a problem that would cripple one of your airports," Sela said.
Five security layers down: you now finally arrive at the only one which Ben-Gurion Airport shares with Pearson — the body and hand-luggage check.
"But here it is done completely, absolutely 180 degrees differently than it is done in North America," Sela said.
"First, it's fast — there's almost no line. That's because they're not looking for liquids, they're not looking at your shoes. They're not looking for everything they look for in North America. They just look at you," said Sela. "Even today with the heightened security in North America, they will check your items to death. But they will never look at you, at how you behave. They will never look into your eyes ... and that's how you figure out the bad guys from the good guys."
That's the process — six layers, four hard, two soft. The goal at Ben-Gurion is to move fliers from the parking lot to the airport lounge in a maximum of 25 minutes.
This doesn't begin to cover the off-site security net that failed so spectacularly in targeting would-be Flight 253 bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab — intelligence. In Israel, Sela said, a coordinated intelligence gathering operation produces a constantly evolving series of threat analyses and vulnerability studies.
"There is absolutely no intelligence and threat analysis done in Canada or the United States," Sela said. "Absolutely none."
But even without the intelligence, Sela maintains, Abdulmutallab would not have gotten past Ben Gurion Airport's behavioural profilers.
So. Eight years after 9/11, why are we still so reactive, so un-Israelified?
Working hard to dampen his outrage, Sela first blames our leaders, and then ourselves.
"We have a saying in Hebrew that it's much easier to look for a lost key under the light, than to look for the key where you actually lost it, because it's dark over there. That's exactly how (North American airport security officials) act," Sela said. "You can easily do what we do. You don't have to replace anything. You have to add just a little bit — technology, training. But you have to completely change the way you go about doing airport security. And that is something that the bureaucrats have a problem with. They are very well enclosed in their own concept."
And rather than fear, he suggests that outrage would be a far more powerful spur to provoking that change.
"Do you know why Israelis are so calm? We have brutal terror attacks on our civilians and still, life in Israel is pretty good. The reason is that people trust their defence forces, their police, their response teams and the security agencies. They know they're doing a good job. You can't say the same thing about Americans and Canadians. They don't trust anybody," Sela said. "But they say, 'So far, so good'. Then if something happens, all hell breaks loose and you've spent eight hours in an airport. Which is ridiculous. Not justifiable
"But, what can you do? Americans and Canadians are nice people and they will do anything because they were told to do so and because they don't know any different."

Pinky the pilot
19th Nov 2010, 00:57
The 'Israelification' of airports: High security, little bother

AussieAviator; Makes a lot of sense, does'nt it! An eminently sensible procedure developed by a Nation that has virtually been under seige since it was founded in 1948.

What price Australia doing the same?:hmm:

Worrals in the wilds
19th Nov 2010, 02:19
Great article, thanks. However Pinky (g'day btw) has hit on the key word...price. The Austalian government won't pay for the number of trained officers it takes to run the Israeli rockshow. Hell, they don't even pay for the current setup but duckshove responsibility to private companies that pay the bare minimum, train to the bare minimum and for the most part, hire the bare minimum.

Good luck with Senator X, that's a great idea. People who work in oil refineries, fertilizer factories, DG transport companies and many other risky places can go to work with a bare minimum (if any) security, so why are aviation workers subjected to more intrusive and incovenient harassment every time we draw breath?

Mr. Hat
19th Nov 2010, 07:14
Update on Plane Talking by Ben Sandilands:

Plane Talking (http://blogs.crikey.com.au/planetalking/)

November 19, 2010 – 5:52 pm, by Ben Sandilands
There will be no intimate, offensive or indecent physical examinations of air travellers using Australian airports when body scanners are introduced in the New Year.

A spokesperson for the Minister for Infrastructure and Transport, Anthony Albanese, confirmed that Australia would not go down the same path as the US Transportation Security Administration, which has caused uproar at American airports by requiring physical genital area touching and feeling searches of those passengers and pilots who refuse to submit to revealing imaging X-ray scans before boarding aircraft.

The spokesperson said that a final decision on the technology to be used initially at a number of Australian international air terminals had not been made, but that the selection would seek out the devices that produced the least possible amount of radiation and coded the data so that the operators could only see stick figures on which suspicious objects would be identified by symbols.

The scanners would be used for secondary rather than primary screening.

Plane Talking understands that instead of ordering persons who refused body scanning to submit to a hands on experience, the Australian way will be to deny boarding to the passenger, who will be told to leave the terminal.

No scan, no fly. Simple. (Maybe). Certainly different to the inane situation in San Diego in which John Tyner, a software engineer, who refused to have ‘my junk’ touched by a TSA official, was then threatened with a $10,000 fine if he left the terminal, even though he had cancelled his flight, received a refund for the fare, and no longer had any reason to be at the airport.

The public anger over the new TSA get-naked-scanned or get-physically-examined procedure continues to grow in the US. The media is full of stories questioning government mandated molestation as a prerequisite for boarding an airliner, and social media videos of passengers being ordered to submit to manual checks that would in criminal law be a sexual or indecent assault.

These incidents have also involved children and elderly passengers.

In the past week an Opt-Out protest movement has begun to grow through social and public media in the US, with calls for mass refusals to submit to physical checks or electronic strip searches next Wednesday, the day before Thanksgiving, and one of the busiest days for domestic air travel in the US. However there are some doubts that many travellers would give up their turkey and family reunion feasts on that day, even if they start to cut back on air travel at other times.

In Australia, part of the emphasis of the evaluation process for secondary scanning machines has been on the potentially harmful cumulative effects of low levels of radiation on those who operate the machines or who as other airport workers or pilots have to cross the landside/airside security divide many times a day.

In the US however the TSA prohibited the wearing of radiation dosimeters by its airport workers, thus removing the risk of employees being able to prove excessive exposure to the scanners.

It could be that the theatrical and often hysterical political investment in security paranoia in the US has finally outreached itself. Literally.

Looks like the Moron Minister Albanese is determined to make his mark again. (failed dismally with jump seat policy!)

the Australian way will be to deny boarding to the passenger, who will be told to leave the terminal.


No scan, no fly. Simple.

Damn right no scan no fly. You'll be missing 84% of the pilots on this forum. Then again he'll probably find a way to get some highschool students to sit in the right seat.

I love the references to "low level" radiation. Let me guess its all going to be fine because the government says so. Hmm I might go and get some insulation in my ceiling while I'm at it. People die prematurely when people with this IQ level are allowed to make decisions.

My question to the minister STILL is:

Why are cleaners, caterers, baggage handlers and refuellers and other staff allowed airside with no screening yet crews have to be screened? How is this system working to increase safety?

Worrals in the wilds
19th Nov 2010, 09:06
Thanks to Sandilands for taking this into the public arena.

Damn right no scan no fly. You'll be missing 84% of the pilots on this forum.

Not just no scan no fly, but no scan no CS counter, no boarding and aerobridge driving, no terminal operations, no cleaning, the list goes on. These employees are all easier to train/replace than pilots, but still integral to getting the punters airborne. When I worked in a terminal I would often pass through screening ten times a day.

A hell of a lot of people work in the air and on the ground to keep aviation happening. It would be awesome to see those thousands of people come together just once to defend their health and dignity, no matter what company they work for or their professional status.

Anyway, so what exactly is 'secondary screening'? Is it the same as the so called random explosives testing? Those of you with a swarthy appearance will know just how 'random' it really is, having been trace detected more often than a parcel from the Miami Gun Show.
The spokesperson said that a final decision on the technology to be used initially at a number of Australian international air terminals had not been made, but that the selection would seek out the devices that produced the least possible amount of radiation and coded the data so that the operators could only see stick figures on which suspicious objects would be identified by symbols.

I wonder if the sales people who work for the manufacturers of these infernal machines have been in the Land of Oz recently hawking their product to our esteemed leaders. It's happened with seach equipment before, where the Canberra-ites have gone 'wow, that's so cool we'll order 50 of them' only to find that the bloody things don't do anything the sales pitch promised (and sometimes a few undesirable things that it didn't :}).

Jay Arr
19th Nov 2010, 09:24
BEN SANDILANDS, if you are reading, will you PLEASE, get it out into the media, what Mr Hat and the rest of us professional pilots have been saying for YEARS:

Why are cleaners, caterers, baggage handlers and refuellers and other staff allowed airside with no screening yet crews have to be screened? How is this system working to increase safety?

19th Nov 2010, 11:26
Anyway, so what exactly is 'secondary screening'?Secondary screening is what happens when you fail primary screening. Currently it would involve frisk/strip searching. It probably doesn't mean this in this case though, because the number of people who are subject to secondary screening is minimal, and the reason to introduced "advanced" technology is to overcome the limitations of the current technology.

Jock p
19th Nov 2010, 22:57
TSA: Pilots to be exempt from some airport checks

TSA: Pilots to be exempt from some airport checks - BusinessWeek (http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9JJECNO0.htm) :D

20th Nov 2010, 00:26
All pilots or just American pilots?

20th Nov 2010, 01:18
Why are cleaners, caterers, baggage handlers and refuellers and other staff allowed airside with no screening yet crews have to be screened? How is this system working to increase safety?

More importantly, why are pilots not exempt as we once (not so long ago) were? Let's try to focus on getting back into this group of exempt employees !

Aviation Transport Security Regulations 2005

Part 4 Other security measures Division 4.1 Screening and clearing
Regulation 4.10
(b) may pass through a screening point under regulation 4.10.
Persons who may pass through screening point without being screened
For paragraph 41 (2) (b) of the Act, the following persons may pass through a screening point without being screened:
(a) a law enforcement officer who produces his or her identity card as a law enforcement officer;
(b) a screening officer who is engaged in the management of the screening point;
(c) an ambulance, rescue or fire service officer who is responding to an emergency on the landside of the airport;
(d) a member of the Defence Force who is responding to an event or threat of unlawful interference with aviation.
Persons who may enter certain cleared areas other than through screening point
Sterile areas
For paragraph 41 (2) (c) of the Act, a person mentioned in subregulation (2) may enter an area that is a cleared area other than through a screening point if:
for a sterile area within the cleared area — either of the following apply:
(i) he or she is authorised to do so and properly displays a valid ASIC;
(ii) he or she is authorised to do so, properly displays a valid VIC and is supervised by somebody who may enter the sterile area other than through a screening point and properly displays a valid ASIC; and
for a LAGs cleared area within the cleared area — he or she does not have in his or her possession an impermissible LAG product.

Persons who may enter sterile area
(2) For subregulation (1), the persons are the following: (a) an aviation security inspector; (b) an officer of the Australian Customs Service; (c) a screening officer;
(d) an employee of the operator of the airport in which the sterile area is located;
(e) an employee of the operator of a screened air service aircraft;
(f) a contractor, and an employee of a contractor, to the operator of the airport in which the sterile area is located who is engaged in the loading of cargo, stores or checked baggage, or the boarding of passengers, onto a cleared aircraft that is operating a screened air service, or who is otherwise authorised for access to the aircraft;
(g) a contractor, and an employee of a contractor, to the operator of a screened air service aircraft who is engaged in the loading of cargo, stores or checked baggage, or the boarding of passengers, onto a cleared aircraft that is operating a screened air service, or who is otherwise authorised for access to the aircraft.

So as it stands, we are deemed a 'potential terrorist' (quoted straight from a screening officers mouth) until we have passed through the screening point then we are deemed as trusted aircrew once cleared.

Better make sure we check you for explosive traces too because you might just have EXPLOSIVES in your bag! Ok you're all cleared now and we deem you safe to fly your AEROPLANE....:confused:

What would it take for us to be exempt once again?

How could a unified professional pilot group once again arrive at work exempted from the absolutely ridiculous and laughable practice of screening us for things we have no need for? I'm sure it is possible if done correctly!

Some lobbying via AIPA and AFAP perhaps?

And Moderators, how about 2 polls...
First: 'Have you arrived at work overly stressed/anxious due to the screening process/attitudes of screening officers?'
Second:'If YES how often do you arrive at work in this stressed/anxious state?'

20th Nov 2010, 07:33
Enough is Enough..........I think the war on stupidity is ramping up a little.This is an example of disgusting :yuk:

Pat-down woman forced to show fake breast (http://news.ninemsn.com.au/world/8144647/pat-down-woman-forced-to-show-fake-breast)

More and more folk will start coming forward and hopefully this garbage will get turned around

20th Nov 2010, 08:40
The OTS needs to be reined in also and be required to serously consult with industry. Holding a few seminars and meetings to tick off the consultation requirement before going to the minister doesn't cut it.:mad::mad:

20th Nov 2010, 09:14
For me, I will be diplomatic, and say,,,...

GET F^&$%(#ED - you M%*%(%$ERS!

You can scan me a mullion times, strip me, and I will walk to the aeroplane naked. I will still have the most dangerous weapon on the planet - the grey crap between my ears - of which will be strapped to a 300 ton missile filled with jet fuel - but hey you can have my tiny can of deoderant if it makes your day.

The reality is we subjected to the most ongoing set of checks annually than most other industries, and have been working at it for alot of years, - would we do this just to sneak something aboard an aircraft we have control of anyway???

We should be more worried about the blokes who seem to have an all acess - back stage pass to all areas nooquestions asked, without the groping and "it's your shoes".

Reality check Mr Albanese and co!!

20th Nov 2010, 11:40
:8 I dunno. I'm an old bloke and the thought of a bit of a feel-up is giving me a semi. It's free, too. You don't have to buy the groper a drink or dinner.

Seriously, though, it is time to throw out the toys and say f*** this.

VH-Cheer Up
21st Nov 2010, 00:25
Cop this: 'Virtual strip search' backlash goes viral (week in review) | Business Tech - CNET News (http://news.cnet.com/8301-1001_3-20023348-92.html?tag=nl.e496)

John Tyner, a software engineer from Oceanside, Calif., became an Internet sensation after telling a TSA screener: "If you touch my junk, I'll have you arrested." Tyner had the foresight to record the exchange on his mobile phone (videos are here) and is now facing a possible lawsuit for entering a security line and then not allowing a government employee access to his crotch during a pat-down search.

How dare anyone not let a government employee access their crotch... Welcome to 2010 starring Big Brother as Dominatrix. You want to fly, your crotch is mine, dude. And dudettes.

21st Nov 2010, 01:27
On my last flight my First Officer was random tested for explosives.

I must say, when we were at 35000 feet and I was in the dunny, I felt a little safer knowing he hadn't got a bomb in his bag :ugh::ugh:

When will this stupidity end!? I stopped asking practical and sensible questions to these "security" personnel a long time ago, as it seeemed a pointless exercise. But I must say, it's got so bloody ridiculous, I'm getting vocally annoyed again:mad::mad:! This HAS to change soon!

21st Nov 2010, 02:17
Lots of links too

TSA Backscatter X-ray Backlash (http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2010/11/tsa_backscatter.html)

Schneier on Security (http://www.schneier.com/)

Interesting idea from there.

November 24 is National Opt Out Day (http://wewontfly.com/opt-out-day/). Doing this just before the Thanksgiving holiday is sure to clog up airports. Jeffrey Goldberg suggests (http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2010/11/tsa-opt-out-day-now-with-a-superfantastic-new-twist/66545/) that men wear kilts, commando style if possible.

Fruet Mich
21st Nov 2010, 08:40
The other week they confiscated my nose hair clippers!! I had a good laugh and asked them what would do more damage, the nose hair clippers or the 6" pick end of the crash axe?

These guys are unreal, they'll let a 6"4 tall taleban fighter through with a couple of bottles of jack daniels and take a small sharpe object off a 5 year old girl!!?? Go figure!

21st Nov 2010, 20:21
Pressure is now starting to increase worldwide now for a system that actually works. Regional airport bags checked through onto a connecting domestic flight are rarely screened, but transferred to a transit trolley, waiting to be loaded onto that flight. One can only imagine what some of those bags may contain! I have been an airline captain for 24 years, am currently a check and training pilot, go through extensive screening several times a day, and like all of you hold a Australia wide Red ASIC card. Yet, to start my laptop, I had to carry out a finger print scan. There are currently 10,667 pilots in Australia, holding a air side ASIC ID. Surely for those of us that have to go through screening every day, while at work, we could prove ourselves with either a passport scan, or a finger print scan? After all, we do have the keys to the bus, literally speaking!

22nd Nov 2010, 05:15
US airport security pat-down protest | Passenger strips off | TSA (http://www.smh.com.au/travel/travel-news/strip-search-with-a-difference-passenger-arrested-after-stripping-to-avoid-pat-down-20101122-183og.html)
Now while I can sort of understand the whole being arrested for stripping thing, what I can't understand is then being paraded through the terminal in the same fashion.

Josh Cox
22nd Nov 2010, 05:21
Men should wear kilts, with no under garments, sure that would raise some eyebrows,,,,,,,

22nd Nov 2010, 07:24
Looks like the TSA has finally got their act together and have decided to stop screening flight crew.

UPDATE 1-Pilots get reprieve from new U.S. screening checks | Reuters (http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN1921169320101119)

Let's just hope that DOTARS or whoever they're called now can follow their American cousins and common sense shall finally prevail!

Fuel-Off :ok:

22nd Nov 2010, 07:57
from that article 'COMMON SENSE, RISK-BASED APPROACH'... Pilots will be able to skip the new screening checks if they are employed by a U.S. carrier, are on airline business and in uniform. They will have to show their airline identification and a second form of identification, which will be checked against crew databases, the TSA said.It has taken, what ?, around 9 years to reach that 'common-sense' stage.
I won't hold my breath waiting for such a paradim shift from our apparatchik of a transport minister, nor any sensible changes from the bureaucracies with vested interests in expanding their empires.
There is money to be made by the security-industry and their lobbyists, so they will keep the fear-factor simmering. (hey, there are still airstrips that don't have security-cameras and watchers and kangaroo-friendly fences).

spits in disgust

Mr. Hat
22nd Nov 2010, 23:34
More importantly, why are pilots not exempt as we once (not so long ago) were? Let's try to focus on getting back into this group of exempt employees !

Scumbag is spot on.

Its time to bring to the public arena these facts:

1. Pilots have access to a large axe in the flight deck. No amount of security screening will change this fact.

2. Pilots have UNLIMITED options available to them when it comes to causing death and destruction on board an airplane beginning at the flight planning stage right through taxiing to the terminal. No amount of security screening will change this fact.

3. Pilots are losing/have lost valuable time they once had for flight planning and preflight preparation whilst waiting in security lines playing along with the security pantomime in this industry. This is a reduction in safety.

4. Pilots are growing tired of people who do not know the first thing about their profession/industry making decisions/comments that affect how they do their job. Unions need to address this once and for all.

5. The measures put in place are reducing safety by reducing the time available to pilots to do their job. They are an unnecessary distraction at a time when the ONLY focus should be on preflight checks.

6. The screening is the equivalent of screening police when they enter their workplace only to then pick up their gun at sign on.

Enough is enough of this game we're all having to play. Perhaps the body scanners are actually doing us a favour much like the Jetstar cadetship in that its finally got some public attention and will be hopefully subject to some common sense debates.

Nick Xenophon, Ben Sandilands or who ever else is interested in an INCREASE in safety please put this into the public forum because its time to stop this charade once and for all.

22nd Nov 2010, 23:41
US airport security pat-down protest | Passenger strips off | TSA
Now while I can sort of understand the whole being arrested for stripping thing, what I can't understand is then being paraded through the terminal in the same fashion.

Really?? He stripped to his jocks, you'll get more flesh at a public beach.

23rd Nov 2010, 00:17
What a bunch of sooks.
A bunch of whiners who think they are above it all.
Are red lights too much trouble for you?
Should you have your own line at the supermarket?
Yep its a pain, but if you can't handle something so simple (and annoying) I question your ability to manage an airliner.
Osama must be laughing his head off if he reads PPRUNE and this thread

teresa green
23rd Nov 2010, 01:47
Well, Oz Biggles, it has been now reported in that doubtful rag, The Sydney Morning Herald, that already 100 scan photos are on the net. Just charming, if after a hard tiring flight, there you were, on facebook, for the world to see. All of you. Both Tech and Cabin crew have every reason to be incensed, as well as PAX, and if you won't wear that, to be groped by some stranger, who probably bats for the other side, and absolutely LOVES their new job. And all you have to do is lock the other pilot out on a trip to the dunny, and head toward the closest mountain or the sea. In larger crew, one in the crew rest, one in the dunny, and whack with the crash axe. All done and dusted. Has that ever occured to these idiots, who make these rules.:ugh:

23rd Nov 2010, 02:21
And don't forget that this screening does NOT apply to Cleaners, Caterers and Engineers, who all have access to Aircraft and can put what ever they like in it! Security is just a farce, it is just for show nothing else and a complete waste of money in its present form. :ugh:

23rd Nov 2010, 03:47
What a bunch of sooks.
A bunch of whiners who think they are above it all.
Are red lights too much trouble for you?
Should you have your own line at the supermarket?
Yep its a pain, but if you can't handle something so simple (and annoying) I question your ability to manage an airliner.
Osama must be laughing his head off if he reads PPRUNE and this thread

Did it hurt while they brainwashed you? Or were you born a moron?

Please for the good of humanity put your hand up for extra screening, we can only hope it sterilises you and saves us from your seed.

Ken Borough
23rd Nov 2010, 05:41
It is very easy to acquire pilots and crew uniforms and what would pass muster as an ASIC Card or similar. That so, if pilot/crew screening was abolished, it would be quite simple for an impostor pilot/crew to walk airside with a bag full of 'goodies' and then pass them to a punter who had already passed through security checks, or use them himself with evil intent. The issue of terminal screening has to be that simple.

Screening on the ramp is another issue and should not for one minute be confused with screening in the terminal. Perhaps it needs to be strengthened?

psycho joe
23rd Nov 2010, 06:17
It is very easy to acquire pilots and crew uniforms and what would pass muster as an ASIC Card or similar. That so, if pilot/crew screening was abolished, it would be quite simple for an impostor pilot/crew to walk airside with a bag full of 'goodies' and then pass them to a punter who had already passed through security checks, or use them himself with evil intent. The issue of terminal screening has to be that simple

It would presently be easier to pose as a baggage handler and walk unchallenged throught the side door / gate.

Better still. Pose as a tourist and either join the busy check in queue or the security screening queue with a bag full of explosive and take out the whole terminal. Do this simultaneously in BNE, SYD and MEL and you've effectively wiped out air travel and caused mass hysteria in an entire continent. Imagine the fallout. Taffic jams, EMS totally overloaded, communication systems overloaded, mass confusion, people wandering around dazed/burnt/bleeding, pictures on every news cast in the world showing smoke billowing out of Sydney terminal. Bye bye tourism.

All this is possible without going anywhere near a security guard, a metal detector, an X-Ray machine or explosive trace detector. Why would terrorist groups risk getting caught, just to hi jack a couple of hundred people on a plane, when the same number that were involved in the 9/11 attacks could stop an entire nation without so much as checking in?

But let's not worry our little heads about reality. As long as I take my shoes and belt off, then we must be safe. :rolleyes:

porch monkey
23rd Nov 2010, 06:53
Ken, you continually prove yourself to be an idiot. First, with the jump seat issue, now with this. We already get the same checks as everybody else. While most of us grumble about it, we do it. The issue is the further personal degradation and possible health affects by use of the scanning and grope test. Why don't you put your effort in to dealing with the real security issues, like the people who have access who undergo no screening? You seem to think that we as pilots consider ourselves way above everybody else. We don't. We want security like most. The difference is, we see it from the inside, good and bad. That is why we are vocal about addressing the real issues, and getting value for the incredible amounts of money spent. When you can actually understand that concept, then come and talk to us. Or is your real name Albanese?

Mr. Hat
23rd Nov 2010, 07:15
What a bunch of sooks

Another strong contribution. Security screening doesn't worry me, being exposed to radiation multiple times a day does. We've got better things to do than play the pretend security game.

Should you have your own line at the supermarket?

No but give we could destroy an airplane and the whole terminal with little or no effort we wouldn't mind having the same security screening as catering!

I question your ability to manage an airliner.

Now its just getting weird.

Don't be so precious!

Don't waste my time. We're busy and don't have time for dress ups.

As for the pretend pilot boarding the plane in the guise of a staff traveller. Valid point but easily fixed by a card check or swipe at the gate. In fact this happens at check in in with my company (duty/staff travel).

Please for the good of humanity put your hand up for extra screening, we can only hope it sterilises you and saves us from your seed.

Righto thats the funniest line I've read in a while. Well done eco :D.

23rd Nov 2010, 08:09
I, for one, cant wait. I will refuse the 'reproductive-organ-killing-scanner' on my next States trip. And will tell the security personnel (very, very, VERY loudly) that they are turning me on, "oh touch there, yeah feel there, go for it baby it feels soooo good" it'll be a laugh. But I want kids, so will never allow them to put me through an xray scan that targets my reproductive organs . Also happy to cop a flight delay over it.

Cabin crew have access to the flight deck, as well as total access to Pilot's meals, so if Pilots are going to be permitted to avoid these scanners and molestations, so should cabin crew.

It has been published that the security guards touch womens' labia/ vagina as well as removing a woman's prosthetic breast. If you did any of that on a train platform you would end up in jail for rape.

This is just stupidity.


23rd Nov 2010, 09:17
This is not a question of employee benefits or travel perks. This core issue is subjecting pilots to unreasonable security checks (bordering on harassment in the U.S.) every time they present for work.

Firstly a key issue:
Common sense dictates that pilots are a very low threat to security. In fact they are responsible for the safe conduct of their flight.

Do pilots represent a threat to their own aircraft, and how should this be managed?
I would imagine that most readers on this forum would be aware that pilots control the trajectory of their own aircraft, and should one pilot wish to do the unthinkable while the other was taking a bathroom break, it wouldn't be that hard. Pilots are employed to ensure the safe conduct of their flight, a great deal of trust is instilled with this responsibility. Pilots should be, and are, adequately vetted, profiled and monitored to ensure this trust is not misplaced. Any reasonable person can see that checking a pilot for weapons, explosives or even a 110g tube of toothpaste is a waste of time and resources.

But what about if they were to pass a weapon to someone else in the sterile area with the view to threatening an aircraft other than their own?
Well, we've already established that a pilot has been vetted and entrusted with the safety of their own aircraft, ie. they do not represent a serious risk of a suicide mission, so what could be the possible motivations for such an action? The pilot is under duress? perhaps his/her family has been threatened or taken hostage? Why would a pilot be a greater risk for this than a law enforcement officer who is already exempt from screening, or a screening officer? and besides, I have enough faith in airport security and screening officers that they would be able to detect the differences that would present in the persona of a pilot/police officer/screener in such a circumstance. How about financial incentive? Well really how much is a pilot at risk? I would suggest pilots as professional workers, with years of training and who are reasonably well remunerated present the same, if not less of a risk profile that a law enforcement officer or screening personnel.

But what if someone was to impersonate a pilot?
or as Ken Borough put it It is very easy to acquire pilots and crew uniforms and what would pass muster as an ASIC Card or similar. Why would it be easier to impersonate a pilot than a police officer? How can the threat be managed? How about the same as it will be soon in the US, a database of airline pilot's with matching photos and two forms of high quality ID.

What about this business of aircraft cleaners and ramp personnel?
Heres the ridiculous part, we screen pilots who present a very low threat yet choose not to screen airport workers who; have access to aircraft, could easily hide an explosive or weapon, generally (some) earn a lower salary than pilots and would therefore be more at risk to financial persuasion, can enter their job with very little training (lead time), and are less able to be monitored than qualified airline pilots.

Airport security must be simple and pilots are just being precious aren't they?
Screening pilots is counter-productive and does nothing for simplicity. There are already groups of people exempt from screening. Pilots should be allowed to go about their jobs and critical pre-flight routine without distraction and harassment, they should be part of the security solution, not part of the problem!!!

One final note, this exemption to screening for pilots, is not about any perceived superiority complex, it just makes good sense, we are not talking about allowing pilots to bypass security when they are off-duty but when they are working and entrusted with the ultimate responsibility for the safety of their flight and the 400 odd people they may be carrying.


FRQ Charlie Bravo
23rd Nov 2010, 13:58
I love the kilt idea, commando style!

Then on the return trip I might even opt to go through the radiation shower wearing a knee length lead vest that I reckon I can borrow from a dentist friend of mine.


Aye, fight and you may not fly. be scanned, and you'll travel... at least this time. And laying in your hotel beds, many miles from the scanner, would you be willin' to trade ALL the cancer, from this day to that, for one chance, just one chance, to come back here and tell our enemies that they may take our tweezers, but they'll never take... OUR PICTURES!


23rd Nov 2010, 14:17
Very well said sir. Can I suggest that you send your post in a formal letter to:
Paul Retter - Executive Director OTS,
Mike Mrdak - Secretary Dept of Infrastructure
Anthony Albanese - Minister for Infrastructure and Transport.

It's about time that these clowns in OTS who have clearly never worked in the aviation sector are called to account. It has become something of a haven for retired cops and military types.

Perhaps Senator Xenophon would should also be lobbied. He was after all quite instrumental in defeating the governments latest flight deck access legislation.

23rd Nov 2010, 21:59
But what about if they were to pass a weapon to someone else in the sterile area with the view to threatening an aircraft other than their own?

You could address this point by simply bypassing the sterile area.

24th Nov 2010, 00:15
Flight Attendants are now exempt in the US as well.
US flight attendants exempted from body scanners (http://www.smh.com.au/travel/travel-news/us-flight-attendants-exempted-from-body-scanners-20101124-1865a.html)

In the meanwhile we can all just wear:
Airport body scanner protection | Underwear blocks radiation (http://www.smh.com.au/travel/travel-news/scannerproof-undies-keep-passengers-junk-private-20101123-185dm.html)

24th Nov 2010, 00:31
YouTube - Young Boy Strip searched by TSA (Original w/ Full Story Description) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XSQTz1bccL4&feature=player_embedded)

Inverted Body Scanner Image Shows Naked Body In Full Living Color (http://www.infowars.com/inverted-body-scanner-image-shows-naked-body-in-full-living-color/)

New Body Scanners to Store Biometrics | Dprogram.net (http://dprogram.net/2010/11/12/new-body-scanners-to-store-biometrics/)

Question is when will this ridiculas security issues stop? Next it will be the train stations, concerts etc etc.

It is unfounded, and the ironic timing of the shoe and underware bomber, printer bombs in the lead up to the introduction of these scanning devices and the US elections.

Unfortunately the Chernoff who introduced the scanners while in public office is now ceo of the scanner company. Scam/corruption plain and simple. :suspect:

Not to mention the Health effects of backscattter radiation that is 10x more than a chest xray. And the fact that these machines can also store images and they do, as well as store biometric data as well.

What is the media doing about it? not that much, occasionally coming out with sensationalised stories of threats.
9/11 Mastermind Invited to Pentagon (http://www.infowars.com/al-qaeda-mastermind-invited-to-pentagon-after-911/)

Al-Qaeda terror mastermind Anwar Al-Awlaki had dinner at the pentagon after 9/11. Is anyone paying attention to this. Most of all of this is govt sponsered terror is to scare populations. And people are so busy, they dont want to read about this, they just believe what the "news" tells them! :ugh:

Just say NO to the scanners and the patdowns. World Opt out day is NOV 24th 2010.:ok:

VH-Cheer Up
24th Nov 2010, 00:43
Quote from MaxHelixAngle:
But what about if they were to pass a weapon to someone else in the sterile area with the view to threatening an aircraft other than their own?
Quote from fallen:You could address this point by simply bypassing the sterile area.

Errm... How? Care to explain? Surely once you're checked, you're through to the sterile area, then on to the concourse and then the gate. How would you get to the aircraft without traversing the sterile area?

Worrals in the wilds
24th Nov 2010, 01:34
Very easily if you go airside. Airside areas are not part of the sterile area and they have multiple access points that are not in the sterile area. There is basic airside access security now at the bigger airports (and I mean basic) but nothing like the level at the sterile area access points.

This is why people are complaining about cleaners, engineers etc accessing aircraft without going through screening. The majority of staff that access aircraft do so with little or no screening at all.

Atlas Shrugged
24th Nov 2010, 01:38
If any one of those turkeys touches my goolies at an airport I'll stab them in the face!

VH-Cheer Up
24th Nov 2010, 01:40
Very easily if you go airside. Airside areas are not part of the sterile area and they have multiple access points that are not in the sterile area. There is basic airside access security now at the bigger airports (and I mean basic) but nothing like the level at the sterile area access points.

This is why people are complaining about cleaners, engineers etc accessing aircraft without going through screening. The majority of staff that access aircraft do so with little or no screening at all.

Doh! And once airside, what prevents someone accessing the ground-level stairs to get back up to the gate to board the aircraft?

Captain Nomad
24th Nov 2010, 02:28
Very eloquent Max Helix Angle - great stuff!

Crew screening is much like screening a Doctor before he walks into the hospital and taking a pocket knife off him before he goes to work with drugs, needles and scalpels as a highly qualified surgeon. The security then smile thinking they have successfully eliminated the possibility of a Dr Patel reoccurrance... :ugh: Meanwhile, orderlies and nurses who will also work in the operating theatre with the Doctor are allowed in the back door without any screening.

It's a very rough analogy but it illustrates the current stupidity...

Worrals in the wilds
24th Nov 2010, 11:49
Doh! And once airside, what prevents someone accessing the ground-level stairs to get back up to the gate to board the aircraft?

Good will, honesty and rules. Scarily enough, most of the time it works.

24th Nov 2010, 12:26
c'mon DOTARS, bring it on....

24th Nov 2010, 19:58
MaxHelixAngle, I have one very serious and possibly insurmountable problem with what you wrote:

It does not take into account the blind stupidity of Governments, politicians, and bureaucracies.

25th Nov 2010, 02:13
I agree, anyone goes for a touchup on my nuts, I'll be sure to go a touchup on their face. The last thing they would remember when waking up in hospital is that a fist hit them in the face at a 120mph:mad:

25th Nov 2010, 02:45
I'll do the pat-down if she's a hot blonde. Otherwise, I'll quote the Software Engineer.

25th Nov 2010, 06:44

Somehow I don't think anyone's going to remember ANYTHING if you hit them that hard. :ooh:

From http://www.ama-assn.org/meetings/public/annual99/reports/csa/rtf/csa3.rtf

One kinematic analysis of the mechanical properties of a boxing punch from a professional heavyweight estimated a peak force on impact of 0.4 ton delivered at a velocity of 8.9 meters/sec, which represents a blow to the head approaching 0.63 ton. The latter is equivalent to swinging a padded wooden mallet with a mass of 6 kg at 20 miles per hour.

I totally agree with your sentiments though. :D

25th Nov 2010, 09:39
Any news on the opt out in the states today?

25th Nov 2010, 10:01
It is only 6am in New York. A bit early yet.

25th Nov 2010, 11:37
I trained as a radiographer in the 70's an let met put some facts in this discussion. Firstly nobody knows how much radiation is too much, there are cumulative dose standards, but they do not explain all eventualities. For example one theory is we need to only hit one cell, in the right place, at the wrong time. It was explained, in this way get your mate to take a marble out and drop it somewhere in Sydney Harbour, then you fly over at FL400 and drop another marble. If you hit, you have a problem.
This theory works in that it explains rare occurrences with minimal exposure and fits the massive exposure scenario, throw out millions of marbles one has to hit. It even explains the people submitted to high levels with no adverse event, they all missed.
Next this ionising radiation is backscatter low energy stuff that does not penetrate far but rather, is absorbed by soft tissue, considered to be more risky.
Radiation is most dangerous to rapidly dividing cells, that's why it's used and is effective in cancer treatment , and you avoid any x-rays on women in early pregnancy at all cost.
One of the fastest growing areas off the body are the cornea of your eyes. It has been described as growing like weed because the cells divide so rapidly .
So you blokes who are going to be driven through these scanners several times a day will be a significant risk of bizarre , rare but increasing in frequency ophthalmic conditions and malignancies . You won't have worry about getting visual on the ILS , it won't look any different.
I will not be exposed anywhere near as much as the professionals, but I am not going through the scanners. I will drive the C172, and if that's out of reach I will not go.

25th Nov 2010, 16:23
A New Zealander who was held up at Heathrow Airport for a day after refusing to get a body scan is returning home after being put onto another flight.

Aucklander James Holder, 28, was selected at random for additional security screening after walking through the metal detector without disruption on Wednesday.

The X-ray devices can detect weapons and explosive devices concealed on the body by creating a naked image of the subject.

The scanners were installed at London Heathrow and Manchester airports in February after a failed 2009 Christmas Day bombing attempt and are being tested for further use on the public.

The body scans are causing heated debate in the United States, where the Transportation Security Administration expanded the use of full-body image scanners that use low levels of radiation to create what looks like a nude image of the screened passenger to detect hidden weapons or contraband.

The TSA has also begun implementing a more aggressive pat-down search technique at security checkpoints.

Mr Holder was in Europe for work and was on his way home when he was selected for scanning this week. He said he politely refused the scan.

He said it was a step too far in personal invasion and he did not wish to see it enforced upon every traveller.

"It's the principle that gets me. Some dodgy looking security officer inspecting my nude body on the screen magnifying areas that are of interest. What happens if they make this the standard procedure?"

He was happy to be stripped, searched, and patted down, but British airport security told him that was no longer a choice.

"Apparently it's the body scanner or nothing ... The law it seems offers no rights to another option."

Mr Holder was taken back to the airline desk and told he could not depart for New Zealand until officials allowed him through security again.

"The airline staff, while sympathetic, couldn't override the security officers."

He was not a prude but drew the line at a device that allowed someone to display live naked images at whim, he said.

In New Zealand the body scanners are prohibited under the Aviation Crimes Act.

25th Nov 2010, 23:35
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/11/25/body-scanners-headed-trains-ships-mass-transit/ (It May Be Time for Trains, Ships and Mass Transit to Use Body Scanners)

"We need more cancer, I mean scanners."

26th Nov 2010, 13:58
I would opt for the feel up rather than the radiation scan. I would demand for it to be done by a female security officer (the cutest one possible). It would be a pleasurable experience and would make my day before my flight.

27th Nov 2010, 04:56
I agree with your logic, but WHERE are you zgoint to find a cute security officer. They tend to be very "butch" and old. Dame Edna puts them to shame.

Most of the males are more attractive.:yuk:

27th Nov 2010, 22:47
Great: just left the military for the airlines... Not going to have canver by the time Im 50...

My next post...

Great: just left the airlines for the military... :ouch:

28th Nov 2010, 08:55

At the 38 second mark listen carefully. Seems Delta are onto it, I wonder what they will do with their future adverts now the TSA have pissed off the travelling public a whole heap more.

Worrals in the wilds
28th Nov 2010, 21:59
The successful capture and arrest of a Somali born would be terrorist in the US over the weekend demonstrates how terrorists are detected; generally with excellent ground work by talented, well trained intelligence people in operations that take months, not by cut price contractors 'randomly' irradiating/groping passengers and staff at airports. Good luck to those agents and tech geeks, they are expected to be right every time and so far the worldwide track record is pretty good. :ok:

Given that the accused was intent on blowing up a public Christmas gathering with no security whatsoever, is Albanese going to introduce random frisk searches at every major Carols By Candlelight across the country? After all, someone in the US attempted it, so it must be a risk, right? One we can fix with a bunch of potentially harmful and degrading 'security' measures?

The trouble is that the snivelling politicians aren't allowed to talk about the Intelligence agencies' spookier activities and can't turn them into big, jazzy press releases of the 'Look at me, I'm such an awesome Minister' variety. :rolleyes: At the end of the day I think that's all this is about.

Mr. Hat
28th Nov 2010, 23:55
Worrals, please stop coming up with these common-sense arguments. They have no place in our society.

As per the first post in this thread - This country is run by people that create populist policies that will somehow keep them in a job. The entire system is based on gaining and keeping a seat and not on actual solution that will work.

Every time a terrorist comes up with a new plan (there are an infinite number no doubt), the pollies will come up with another restriction/idea/"plan". In the end air travel will become so restrictive that people will begin to look to other methods if possible.

High speed rail MEL SYD would be the end of that route.

Mr. Hat
29th Nov 2010, 02:19
Told you so.

The clock is ticking on our congested, crappy airports and security fun and games.

Fortunately for us regardless of the party its unlikely to get done in a hurry!

All We Need For Christmas Is A Very Fast Train | Lifehacker Australia (http://www.lifehacker.com.au/2010/11/all-we-need-for-christmas-is-a-very-fast-train/)

By Angus Kidman on November 29, 2010 at 11:30 AM

The concept of some sort of very fast train (VFT) service connecting major cities is endlessly discussed in Australia, but nothing ever seems to happen. Why can’t we get this concept moving?

Picture by Thierry Llansades

Last week I travelled to Perth to attend the Ausrail conference, the annual gathering at which Australia’s various rail industry companies and bodies get together and discuss the state of railways. There’s a lot of bodies to represent, because rail in Australia still largely runs on state lines, reflecting the unfortunate decision made in the 1800s to install different gauges across the country. That lack of Victorian-era foresight is still impacting on rail planning in the 21st century, despite the recognised benefits of trains in terms of environmental impact compared to most alternatives.

While there are railway lines of some description in every state of Australia, it would be hard to describe us as a model of efficient train usage. Once you leave the eastern seaboard, there are no train services which passengers can take outside of a capital city which offer other connections within the same state. The Indian Pacific, Ghan and Overlander services offer interstate connections for tourists, but don’t remotely resemble a general use service. Within capital cities, there’s something going in in every mainland state, and even a handful of free options, but no-one who lives in Melbourne or Sydney would argue that those public transport systems work particularly well.

The bulk of Australia’s $35 billion rail industry comprises freight, and that makes sense — anything that can remove trucks from the roads is a good idea. But one of the more compelling ideas pushed at Ausrail is also one of the oldest: introducing a high-speed train service to connect our capital cities and other major centres, enabling passengers to skip long drives or cramped flights to move around.

Using fast train systems developed elsewhere in the world, a high-speed line between Melbourne and Sydney could run in just three hours. For all practical purposes, that’s faster than flying (given the need to get to the airport and to arrive considerably in advance). And there’s plenty of demand on the route: Sydney-Melbourne is the fourth-busiest air route in the world, with more than 950 flights a week. Sydney to Brisbane and the Gold Coast isn’t far behind, with a combined total of more than 830 each week.

In global terms, introducing a simple service connecting two or three capitals is remarkably unambitious. China’s plans for a national fast rail network, which it only began planning in 1994, includes 16,000 kilometres of new lines and aims to connect every city with a population of 200,000 people or more. An equivalent list of cities in Australia would include Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane, Perth, Adelaide, Canberra, the Gold Coast, the Sunshine Coast, Newcastle, Wollongong and the Central Coast. There are trains of some sort in all those cities, but nothing resembling a high-speed connection between any of them.

As I’ve said before when discussing public transport, it’s unlikely and unfeasible that Australians can abandon their reliance on motor vehicles. But if we can reduce our usage, it will make a difference. To note another figure often quoted at Ausrail: transport is responsible for 15% of Australia’s carbon emissions, and 89% of that figure comes from motor vehicles.

Lifehacker Australia editor Angus Kidman likes a slow train trip as much as the next tourist, but not when there’s stuff to do and no 3G signal to be had. His Road Worrier column, looking at technology and organising tips for travellers, appears each week on Lifehacker.

29th Nov 2010, 03:50
Mr Hat:
High speed rail MEL SYD would be the end of that route.

really? I suspect it would be pretty easy to find somewhere along 800km of track to tamper and have pretty bad consequences for a high speed train - a security solution? depends what you're selling.

Mr. Hat
29th Nov 2010, 04:10
Indeed maggot but I don't see any lines at security at train stations nor any plans for body scanners.

Our industry attracts media attention thus we need as many pretend measures as possible.

My point i that there will be a point where to get from Melbourne to Sydney will at some point get all too hard and if there happens to be a high speed alternative people will take it.

Joker 10
29th Nov 2010, 04:28
This has got to be one of the greatest ideas I've heard.......and I'm sure that someone could figure out how to do it!

Here's a simple solution to the controversy over full-body scanners at airports:

Develop an enclosed booth that passengers step into but, instead of X-raying them, when the door closes, it will detonate any explosive device they have hidden on or in their body. The explosion will be contained within the sealed booth. This would be a win-win for everyone!

There would be no concern about racial profiling. The booth would eliminate long, expensive trials.

You're in the airport and you hear a muffled explosion, followed by an announcement over the PA system: "Attention standby passengers, we now have a seat available on flight number..."

What's not to like?!?!?!

29th Nov 2010, 04:49
Mr Hat I redirect you to my link from last week.

Napolitano Eyes Tighter Security for Trains, Ships, Mass Transit - FoxNews.com (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/11/25/body-scanners-headed-trains-ships-mass-transit/)

A VFT will result in the same security delays as flying except a stop in AY no doubt and the fact that its over an hour longer travel time.

Not to mention the glaringly obvious risk involved with travelling 300+km/h along the ground for 3 hours. A train crash at 300 or a plane crash at 300 is a crash at 300 and chances of surviving are next to nil. At least in a plane you're only close to obstacles for 30mins of travel time, regardless of distance.

Worrals in the wilds
29th Nov 2010, 08:14
The Euros run high speed trains without big security hassles. There's basic X-ray / magnetometer stuff, but there weren't any big delays on the British, French or Spanish systems when I used them, anyway. The Spanish have legitimate terrorist problems (and had a railway station blown up in 2004) but they still don't go in for OTT security.

Chocks Away
30th Nov 2010, 03:44
Given that the accused was intent on blowing up a public Christmas gathering with no security whatsoever, is Albanese going to introduce random frisk searches at every major Carols By Candlelight across the country? :D:D Good capture! :}:}

First, he'll (they'll) take a sly poll to see what the public think, then they'll try and scramble a policy together, announce it, wait for the response... then run with it if no one was listening or didn't hear properly. :}
The way Victoria has swung big time, I can't see them meandering around in office too much longer.

The radiation we put up with on a daily basis is enough to worry me. For example, Pilots & Doctor/Nurses constantly around radiation have a propensity to give birth to daughters. We have changed natural selection already enough, through what we put up with. No more radiation for me.

30th Nov 2010, 22:30
And have a read of this........ how Ironic :E

Weasel Zippers Blog Archive Rest Assured my Friends, We’re Now Safe From the Scourge of Wheelchair-Bound Nun’s Thanks to the TSA… (http://weaselzippers.us/2010/11/29/rest-assured-my-friends-were-now-safe-from-the-scourge-of-wheelchair-bound-nuns-thanks-to-the-tsa/)

1st Dec 2010, 04:05
Intimate body searches....


2nd Dec 2010, 05:59
Am I the only one who looks at those photos and is thinking "airport"? Scary that comedic satire, purely for its over-the-top absurdity, has become common place.

3rd Dec 2010, 05:55
Wheelchair-bound woman in hour search - The West Australian (http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/world/8442948/wheelchair-bound-woman-hour-search)

Wheelchair-bound woman in hour search


The United States extreme airport security measures have been exposed again when it emerged that a 52-year-old wheelchair-bound woman was hand-searched for more than an hour, even though she was already stripped to her bra and underwear.
The passenger missed her flight from Oklahoma City airport because of the lengthy ordeal.
Tammy Banovac arrived at the airport for a flight to Phoenix dressed only in a trench coat, which she removed for security, over her black undergarments, Britain's Daily Mail reported.
Ms Banovac said she knew her wheelchair would be a problem and set off airport sensors. That, combined with an uncomfortable airport search two weeks ago which she said left her feeling violated, had prompted her to take the extraordinary step of attempting to beat the airport pat downs.
She said that the previous pat-down would have been considered sexual assault if had occurred anywhere but at an airport.
An airport spokesman said Ms Banovac was searched because she refused to go through the metal detector.
The situation became more serious for Ms Banovac when security officers found traces of nitrates, which can be used to make explosives, on her wheelchair.
She said that could have been as a result of a recent hunting trip.
But the mere hint of the potentially explosive material sparked an hour of hand searches and questioning from officers, the Daily Mail reported.
She went home and then repeated the security process and pat-down on Wednesday, again in just her underwear. This time, after no explosive traces were found, she was able to board her plane.
Travellers in the US are becoming increasingly angry at the pat-down searches and invasive scanners which have recently been introduced.
In one case as woman reported she was humiliated after a body scanner showed her sanitary liner and led to a very personal underwear search by an officer.

3rd Dec 2010, 09:30
I hope this is just the beginning...... because there will be thousands of folk like me who would seriously not be going back any time soon. Just been discussing the next OSH trip and others......Broome is looking better ;) via RetardAir.

Qantas miss out some more too!....err sorry V Oz.

3rd Dec 2010, 09:53
I have not had a desire to go the USA until they became a lot less paranoid, but the TSA is just totally over-the-top and not constrained by any sane sense of proportion. (a lot of it is still the legacy of 'dubya' bush, but Obama hasn't improved things)
I also have no desire to go to places that just roll-over and submit to the USA demands on all sorts of issues.
It does somewhat limit where I can go, but it is still a big world and the US of A is not at the centre of it, and they will get the minimum amount of my discretionary money.

teresa green
3rd Dec 2010, 10:27
That lady is 52? There is hope for me yet. She looks like she has had botox from the knees up, however I admire her stand.

8th Dec 2010, 10:20
I think the above post was for a different thread...
But back to the scanners, get a load of this:
Baywatch Playboy bunny humiliated in airport body scan - Armchair Traveller (http://travel.ninemsn.com.au/Blog.aspx?blogentryid=749261&showcomments=true)

13th Dec 2010, 03:11
Hope I did'nt bugga up the link. (Help mods). Anyway, for those of us with a semblance of humour remaining about this subject.

HELP YOU MAKE IT TO YOUR FLIGHT (On YouTube http://tinyurl.com/TSAtv) | Buck Howdy (http://buckhowdy.bandcamp.com/track/help-you-make-it-to-your-flight)


16th Dec 2010, 03:58
interesting. All this to stop terrorism. Well, we all know that is the excuse but I think it all started at 9/11. to erode peoples rights.

Pilots For 9/11 Truth (http://pilotsfor911truth.org/)

19th Dec 2010, 04:01
Firstly, I want to agree with the sentiment on this forum - this is a crock, pure and simple.

Secondly, say you are a 737 pilot coming up to security to get to the 'office'. You are asked to go through the scanner and refuse so they say you must submit yourself to the 'sexual molestation' (and an unwanted firm grope of the male genitals is the perfect description of that). 'No way mate!' is your reply. What happens then? I am assuming they aren't just going to say 'Okay, you called our bluff. Have a good flight.' It seems that you would be stopped from getting onto the plane and since you are needed for the plane to move anywhere beyond the taxiway, the plane will go nowhere.

What will happen then?

Knowing the aviation management scene in Australia, it's likely that some manager would come down from their ivory tower to 'talk it over with you' but if you hold fast what can anyone do? Seems to me that it would show everyone just how much power the pilot has in an airline in determining what goes and what doesn't.

Lastly, I remember reading an article on security at Israeli airports so just had a quick look (and surprisingly for where I live, the word 'Israeli' wasn't blocked and hasn't resulted in the cops belting down my door yet!). There are some things that might not sit entirely comfortably with me (my biggest 'freedom' is freedom from official interference in getting on with my life how I want to) but they do many things that are necessary that the Western world just won't accept - the presence of many TRAINED security personnel to watch everyone who enters the terminal, the checking of passengers and luggage before check in and subjecting checked luggage to overpressure testing to explode any 'devices' before they make it past the first post. Why, oh why, won't these simple but obviously effective measure be adopted yet everything the US does is unfailingly copied, regardless of its effectiveness?

Worrals in the wilds
19th Dec 2010, 12:00
Cos it costs money. Money the federal government doesn't have and wouldn't spend if it did.

It's the same reason they didn't regain control of the screening points the day after 9/11 by making all screening staff public servants with proper training, pay and conditions so decent people would want to work there. They were full of empty promises about how it would all change, but in the end nothing did except for the ban on tweezers and knitting needles. :ugh:

Instead, despite all the whimpering in the press about how they're 'committed to aviation safety' the Department of Infrastructure is happy to leave the basic security checks up to a bunch of poorly paid and minimally trained subcontractors, employed by companies who won those contracts through the tender process by undercutting all their competitors and cutting every corner they possibly could. These are the same badly trained private subcontractors that the DOI would be happy to see frisk search 'random' people, despite the fact that until now, frisk and strip searching powers have been strictly limited to government employed law enforcement officers (who are required to have a level of security clearance, background checks and basic intelligence) with recorded and challengeable reasonable grounds to do so. The only exception is privately run prisons, so basically aviation workers get to be treated the same as convicted criminals :yuk:.

Don't assume that the government wants effective security (as the Israeli government provides) because it's a flawed assumption. What they want is the impression of effective security at no cost or responsibility to themselves.

Mr. Hat
19th Dec 2010, 20:16
'No way mate!' is your reply. What happens then? I am assuming they aren't just going to say 'Okay, you called our bluff. Have a good flight.'

Have the document somewhere or someone that has it electronically (worrals..:O) could post it. Ranging from thousands of dollars to imprisonment are the penalties. So be darn careful what you say and do at security people. Whilst I speak out here I'm not silly enough to speak out or obstruct at the screening point. Remember if you are a hard working tax payer you are living in a police state. If you are a criminal or dole bludger you are living in heaven in Australia. The law only applies to hard working Australians.

Albanese has already said: body scan or no fly = no feel up here. This will be a true test for the "unions". If they're weak on this one we're going to be either leaving the industry or staying and facing the risks of cancer and/or birth defects in the case of pregnant women.

This is one if not the most important pressing issue in our industry like it or not.

19th Dec 2010, 20:35
from SpringerLink - Journal of Transportation Security, Online First? (http://springerlink.com/content/g6620thk08679160/)
via Schneier on Security: Hiding PETN from Full-Body Scanners (http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2010/12/hiding_petn_fro.html)

The sad thing is, that the multinational security industry will lobby hard for more and more money to be thrown at them by compliant polititians.

(I wonder if Mr Albanese will go for the grope ?)

Worrals in the wilds
20th Dec 2010, 12:12
The relevant legislation is the Aviation Transport Security Act and its Regulations, both available on Comlaw via the Googleopoly. Div 3-4 for the ATSR and Div 2 of the ATSA cover most of this stuff.

What will happen then?

From a quick scan, I think s86 of the Aviation Transport Security Act is the most relevant, but only if you insist on entering the sterile area. It carries a 50 penalty unit fine (the current penalty unit is about $110).

If you don't force the issue and walk away, I don't see anything to say that you have committed an offence. I know we discussed this awhile ago and someone else made the valid point that by refusing screening your actions could be seen as suspicious, leaving you open for involuntary search by either the AFP or state police (which is somewhere in the same Act, can't remember where). If you enter the sterile area without screening the operator is also liable for a fine of 200 penalty units if it is found that they didn't administer the screening point properly. Personally I wouldn't take the punt but I'm a naturally cautious individual :suspect:.

As for your employer, I don't know about yours, but rightly or wrongly mine would be pretty :mad:ed off. Like most non-violent civil disobedience, a lot would hang on how many other pilots stood with you in defying the screening. I've been hanging around airports for over a decade and on PPRuNe since about 2004, and in that time I haven't seen a lot of solidarity among aviation workers in general and pilots in particular. It could easily turn into one of those 'and the guys are all behind me on this one... guys... guys???' situations.

I think the only way of fighting this is in the media and before it's implemented. Once it's enshrined in legislation (as with Operation Tweezers :ugh:) it's very hard to work against. Albanese already does a fine job of making himself look stupid, but it's up to all of us to enhance that and point the spotlight at this ridiculous invasion of aviation workers' personal space and health.

Most of the time, individual civil disobedience achieves nothing except making you look like a nutter. If you're not careful it can also make you a criminal. Don't forget that the recent Aviation Screening Review found that the average bogan supports increased aviation screening. Naturally the average bogan only flies once a year (if that) and isn't facing daily irradiation as a condition of their employment.

Fortunately for us, professional noise-makers like Senator Xenaphon and Ben Sandilands have taken a mild interest in this issue, and IMO they can do far more than one person throwing a tantrum at a screening point. Pursuading people like that and our unions to target the issue is far more likely to address this problem, because otherwise we're nothing but ghost opinions in cyberspace fighting the ghost in the government machine.

Mr. Hat
20th Dec 2010, 21:24
I've seen a different list Worrals will have to dig it up..

Mr. Hat
29th Dec 2010, 11:30
TSA vs Pilot The Patriot Pilot | Dedicated to Protecting the American Dream (http://patriotpilot.com/)

YouTube - 'Patriot Pilot' Angers TSA With Video Ripping Security (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=27XJrk-16f4)

America's 'Patriot Pilot' exposes airport security flaws on YouTube | News.com.au (http://www.news.com.au/travel/news/patriot-pilot-exposes-us-airport-security-on-youtube/story-e6frfq80-1225977763945)

by Staff WritersFrom: NewsCore December 29, 2010 9:34AM

THE Californian pilot who posted several YouTube videos criticising security at San Francisco International Airport defended his effort to expose flaws in the screening system after revealing his identity.
The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) is investigating whether Chris Liu, 50, revealed any sensitive information in the six videos, which, among other things, show how ground crews can enter secure areas just by swiping a badge and passing through a single door.
"As you can see, airport security is kind of a farce," he says during the video shot at San Francisco International.
But Liu and his attorney batted down accusations that the videos revealed any airport secrets.

"There are more videos that are on YouTube that go into more detail than mine," Liu said during a press conference at the airport Tuesday. His attorney Don Werno added that the security problems were in plain view and said, "As we all know, terrorists have video cameras."
Related Coverage

Liu, who calls himself "The Patriot Pilot" on his website, had earlier expressed shock at the national controversy his videos stirred.
"There have been numerous articles written about this security problem, and I just wanted to address it," the pilot said Tuesday on ABC's "Good Morning America." "I didn't really think that anybody was watching YouTube, so I didn't really think much of it."

The videos are no longer posted on the website. Liu said he took them down in compliance with his employer, American Airlines. When asked if he was still employed, Liu said "I hope so," as his lawyer tried to divert attention away from the pilot's personal life.

"It's a story about an American who saw a security problem," Werno said. "It's not a personal interest story -- It's a public interest story."
The pilot had been part of a federal security program allowing him to carry a gun in the cockpit, but his weapon was confiscated by federal Air Marshals and he was suspended from the program in light of the investigation.
The TSA told Fox News in a statement last week that it was "confident" in its airport security measures, adding that all pilots who are part of the program authorising them to carry a weapon are expected to keep "sensitive security information" as a condition of their participation

Jock p
7th Jan 2011, 01:57
From another blog

Year to date statistics on Airport screening from the Department of Homeland Security:
Terrorist Plots Discovered 0
Transvestites 133
Hernias 1,485
Hemorrhoid Cases 3,172
Enlarged Prostates 8,249
Breast Implants 59,350
Natural Blondes 3

Erin Brockovich
7th Jan 2011, 04:09
US citizens conditioned to accept being a terrorist until proven guilty 300,000,000+

We all know that 911 was conceived to push through the Patriot Act (and if you don't then it's time to pull your head out of your a$$!)

It has been happening here as well - The Truth About Bali Bombings (://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0SYSwfApjM8)

Did you know that Federal Police can now search your house without a warrant an hold you indefinitely under the Australian legislation. You don't even need to be suspected of terrorism, just anti government sentiment. Free country aye.

Radiation and nude photos will be the least of our problems. I think it's time intelligent people to start waking up

Erin Brockovich
7th Jan 2011, 04:46
Part 2 (http://video.yahoo.com/watch/1765353/5857846)

Angle of Attack
7th Jan 2011, 07:11
Did you know that Federal Police can now search your house without a warrant an hold you indefinitely under the Australian legislation. You don't even need to be suspected of terrorism, just anti government sentiment. Free country aye.

Yeah I know and it is a disgrace, the damn Howard brought that in as some kind of policy, basically it is driving the western world into a laughing stock and the public into clowns. The threat of being killed by a terrorist in a western country is still roughly the same as being struck by lightning in statistical terms. We need the security goons to supervise us when playing golf I reckon, serve the same purpose.

Erin Brockovich
1st Feb 2011, 00:07
Can't wait for CHOGM 2011. Stop and search powers extended to anyone - coming soon to a suburb near you

3rd Mar 2011, 01:18
Cops frisk rail travellers
01 Mar, 2011 01:00 AM
RAIL commuters were made to walk through metal detectors and have police frisk them with hand-held wands at Frankston station on Friday afternoon.

Transit police seized three weapons, arrested a wanted teenager, issued a cannabis caution notice and carried out 175 random searches during Operation Omni, the first of many to be carried out at metropolitan stations.

During the operation, a member of the public told the police he had identified a teenager on the platform as the person depicted in a Crime Stoppers poster at the station.

The police approached the teenager, who admitted to being the person.

The 17-year-old Hastings male was arrested and will be charged on summons with theft and other offences.

Inspector Phillip Green of the Victoria

Police transit safety division said police were committed to targeting crime on public transport.

"We have 250 specialist transit police who are dedicated to ensuring Victoria has a safe public transport system," he said.

-Mike Morris


Frankston Weekly (http://www.frankstonweekly.com.au/news/local/news/general/cops-frisk-rail-travellers/2089194.aspx)

3rd Mar 2011, 03:41
Australia is more paranoid with rules than the usa

1) in usa standby bags go to destination regardless of whether passenger gets on

2) in usa if you fail to make flight, bags don't get offloaded (domestically at least)

How do I know? 1st hand experience.

Mr. Hat
1st Apr 2011, 02:43
Guess which study the authorities will be quoting...

From todays Australian:

AIRPORT body-scanners pose little radiation risk | The Australian (http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/aviation/airport-body-scanners-pose-little-radiation-risk/story-e6frg95x-1226031526648)

AIRPORT body-scanners pose little radiation risk, emitting less than 1 per cent of the dose a person would get from cosmic rays while flying at high altitudes, according to a report from the University of California. Travellers would have to undergo 50 airport body scans to equal the amount of radiation received from a single dental X-ray or 4000 scans to match the radiation exposure from a mammogram, it says. Full-body scanners, which generate detailed and personally revealing images of those screened, are expected to begin being installed at Australian airports later this year.

Suddenly I feel so safe..

1st Apr 2011, 07:02
haha Mr.Hat,

yeah I know, next they will say Fukishima is fine!
Ann coulter said it is!....:ugh:

YouTube - Ann Coulter Says Radiation Is Good For You


1st Apr 2011, 13:10
What is it with these "safe levels". No-one bloody well knows for sure - they are just using their best guess.

Have a read of "Bad Medicine" by John Archer.

He reports on how inaccurate many radiation machines are, their lack of maintenance, poor calibration and operators who aren't even aware of the dose that you will be receiving.

As he says, "All ionising radiation damages human chromosomes. There is no safe level. The lower the dose the less likelihood of damage. All xray examinations, whether they are dental or medical, are cumulative and each exam increases the risk of several types of cancer"

So who will be maintaining the detectors? The same ones looking after the medical equipment?

I'll cop a known grope over an unknown level of radiation exposure any day.

Everything your body is exposed to either contributes to your health or harms it.

Worrals in the wilds
1st Apr 2011, 23:32
It still doesn't adress the invasion of people's privacy with no reasonable grounds by private contractors. Obviously they're going to hammer the 'they don't hurt you' mantra and hope everyone forgets about the other issues.

2nd Apr 2011, 03:26
As he says, "All ionising radiation damages human chromosomes. There is no safe level. The lower the dose the less likelihood of damage. All xray examinations, whether they are dental or medical, are cumulative and each exam increases the risk of several types of cancer"
He is absolutely correct. Every medical doctor knows that.

Ionising radiation damages DNA in cells - that's a cold hard scientific fact. Our bodies do their best to repair that damage. Sometimes they can, sometimes they can't. The risks are greater when you are younger.

The very latest high quality studies on x-ray risks have led to some hospitals in Australia requiring informed consent for even a single CT scan for children, for example.

Of course, everything is a balance of risks. You absolutely need an x-ray if you have suspected broken bones or any of a number of other medical conditions. But do x-ray body scans seriously/significantly reduce the terror risk? I doubt it very much.

And yes, Ann Coulter is a moron, and has severely misinterpreted what the studies say. But then again, she thinks the current scientific evidence proves the earth is 6000 years old too.

2nd Apr 2011, 11:46
It still doesn't adress the invasion of people's privacyThat bit is being addressed

Body scanners to respect privacy: concerns over radiation still have not been settled | The Australian (http://www.theaustralian.com.au/australian-it/body-scanners-to-respect-privacy-concerns-over-radiation-still-have-not-been-settled/story-e6frgakx-1226013739677)

Suspicious objects would be automatically identified and their location shown on a stylised human figure on an adjacent screen.

3rd Apr 2011, 04:12
I see no point in scanning flight crew, that's the dumbest thing about all this,

Spot on Wally there is absolutely no point and I think that we (the Pilots of Australia) should take the opportunity of the introduction of scanning to make a united stand against flight crew screening.

The single most important security check on flight crew should be to make sure we are who we say we are i.e have a look at ASIC cards. How often is this done? I have never had anyone check my ASIC, security is to busy checking my bags for everything that I wouldn't need if I wanted to kill everyone.

3rd Apr 2011, 04:50
F.Nose, agreed mate but for some reason, the pilot groups seem to be under represented when decisions on aviation security are made. Instead, the airlines send along their band of retired cops and defence people now masquerading as security experts.