Honey Trap

[fatboy slim]

Having finished flying this moring in MUC around 1000z, I was walking through the terminal to the transport in uniform, i was stopped by a (very attractive) young lady.

She asked me to take a small parcel through security to a friend who had left it behind. (Alarm bells ringing)

After telling her no way and pointing her at the Info desk i looked round to see a camera crew pointing at us.

A bit of a crude attempt, but for chrissakes be careful out there...

[Flash2001]

This type of journalism is acceptable if and only if they show every refusal as well as the idiots that are willing to take it through. You could and should have frog marched her to the nearest cop. As an alternative shout TWO HUNDERED EUROS! I NEVER HEARD OF SUCH A PRICE!

[DIVINE WIND]

Wasting the time of airport and airline staff is not acceptable.Prankster journos like this are nothing but a serious distraction to professionals if they stoop to any level for the sake of ratings.:mad:

[railwaysengineer]

Two similar stories like fatboy´s, seen yesterday in german tv:
1. Journos prepared a group of good looking young men and ladies with uniforms (completely faked ones, no reference to any existing airline) and the appropriate outlook (hairstyle of the ladies and so on) of an airliners crew.
They made it without any complications until the door of an aircraft (apprxmtl. half an hour before the right crew was exspected).
2. Journos looked out for an attractive (turkish, perfect german language knowledge) young girl.
They asked her to report her passport to be lost to german authorities; she did that.
They asked her to become employee with a an aircraft cleaning company (which should have found out immediately, that there is an employee with a lost/stolen passport, because they have to check that with the authorities).
She got an airport-passport. She got the (orange) jacket of newbees (yellow the others). She got free access to every aircraft until she (inspired by the journos) claimed the aircraft cleaning company has "written her name wrong on her airport-passport" (that was to initiate a new "Check out" of her passport, reported to be lost, because the first one obviously didn´t happen). The only result of that action was: her name on the new "checked" airport passport was written wronger than on the first one.
The journos let her demonstrate to be able to place plastic explosive material (they took this children toy stuff we used decades before, looking exactly like "semtex") in mobiles or even uncovered within the cabin. The journos booked flight on the aircraft and filmed, how they "found" the "bombs".
After four weeks the turkish girl left the company; comment of the journos at the end of the film "they didn´t know until the end of that employment what could have happened . . .".
I aggree with some anger about journos reporting about this complex industrie, but these reports are showing gaps in the security chain. Everyone who has responsability for these aspects within the industry should read and learn.

[Steepclimb]

You don't really have to resort to all that subterfuge to get a bomb on an aircraft. All they manage to prove is that, yet again it's possible to find a way through security. TV always seem to use attractive women though.

Fatboy, it's a pity you didn't spot the camera earlier, you could have grabbed her, (no not there) and called for security. That would have spoiled their day, a few hours questioning and then being flung unceremoniously out of the airport would have been a satisfactory outcome.

[ironbutt57]

She should be arrested for conspiracy....

[fatboy slim]

Steep - the captain was all for hauling her up in front of the law when we realised but imagine the hassle and paperwork etc!!:eek:

[Steepclimb]

Pity! They depend on that reaction. Understandable though. I know one or two Captains of pompous overbearing tempermanet who would enjoy the whole hoopla. Another reaction might be to make a scene and run away screaming 'She's got a bomb'. An MP5 stuck up their noses would cool their enthusiasm.

Imagine if a passenger innocently tried the same thing, their feet wouldn't touch.

[dv8]

Can someone clarify for me what happens when a journalist is caught trying to get past security with knifes, replica guns, etc. and is caught are they not prosecuted?
The cop out of I'm a journalist on an assignment to see if your doing your jobs surely cant be legal?

[Gaza]

As a minimum they should have been reported to the Airport authorities who would have been within their right to demand they leave the premises.

[Konkordski]

She should be arrested for conspiracy....


Probably not an option unless the package contained something unpleasant. If not then what are you going to charge them with? Possession of marzipan?

The point is you're not supposed to take anything on a flight from anyone you don't know.

While I understand that check-in staff have to ask the same questions about 'Who packed your bag' and 'Did anyone give you anything to take on board' a thousand times a day, it worries me that they don't seem to stress the importance of the question. Makes me wonder how many passengers genuinely stop to think before answering.

[Gaza]

Makes me wonder how many passengers genuinely stop to think before answering.

Very true Koncordski.

"Could anyone of interfered with your bag since it was packed?"

Stock answer. "No."

Reality. "Yes" - The hotel porter while it was in the baggage room. Someone in the office while it was unattended beside my desk. Someone on the train while it was on the HEX luggage rack................

I would guess that a huge majority of bags that go through airports every day have been out of sight of the pax at some time since they packed them.

[BlueEagle]

I believe the habit is dying out now but at one time crew would leave their packed bag outside their room door ready for collection by hotel staff.

All it would take is for a terrorist to be in a room on the same floor, grab a bag as soon as it was put outside, back to his room, load it with a bomb and replace it - all within minutes.

Do any airlines still allow their crew to leave their bags outside their rooms?

[PAXboy]

As far as PAX are concerned the answer must be Yes sometimes.

For example, I have to check out of the hotel in the morning. My overnight case sits under the desk all day at the client's premises. I leave the desk for meals and breaks and meetings. It is locked - for what those puny locks are worth.

When asked the question, I say that it was attended.

Why?
Because the chances of someone being inside that building AND spotting an overnight bag AND finding out that it is going on an aircraft AND putting something nasty in it ??? So, when I put my papers and PC away, I have a quick flip through to see if there is 'jokey' stuff from a colleague.

Not ideal, I know.

[qfcabin]

BlueEagle I don't think it would be wise of anyone to answer your question on an open forum.

[Ignition Override]

Don't you sometimes wonder if many of the attractive tv station personalities who enjoy discussing disasters in front of the camera, are actually just frustrated actresses? One of the former tv "ladies" (and I use that term loosely) in this city is now with a national network; the body language with which she pranced around at our airport terminal with "her" camera crew during a labor action left us wondering how stuck up ( in Munchen: eingebildet?) some of these types really are. Many of them could be nice people.

But some seem to believe that they have potential in Hollywood-however it might be limited to that of Asia Carrera [ :) ]on "Spectravision". Hello Dow-Corning products.

Next time anybody sees a camera crew trying such a cheap, crude stunt, it should be passed along to everyone within sight. Those media personnel with integrity would not take part in it.

[BEagle]

One reason I always (pre-9/11) used to take just a small 'cabin compatible' overnight bag was that I could guarantee it wouldn't be out of my sight from packing to unpacking!

But now that even the most innocent item can be claimed by the bottom-fondling failed-wheelclampers as being prohibited, everything goes in the hold. So now when I collect my bag at the baggage carousel, I've no idea where it's been, what's been stolen or what's been planted.............

[Trader]

Maybe she (reporter) was actually a terrorist, posing as a reporter, with the intent of getting something through. When you realize the cameras are there you decide it is a 'probe' and walk away--still unaware ;)

Yup, as said above, cry BOMB and see how they like the gun/search treatment. Make great footage too--if they happen to actually be reporters (I never call them journalists because I think it would be an insult to real journalists).

[Kalium Chloride]

Here's a philosophical question:

I seem to remember that a campaigner for the Lockerbie bombing victims tried to take a replica cassette-bomb through airport security to demonstrate weakness in the system.

Is this attempt to expose flaws to the general public more acceptable, or less, than a reporter's?

[fatboy slim]

Chloride, I would suggest there is a fundamental difference between controlled and organised testing of airport security, which is conducted regularly by the airport companies and the DoT, and the sheer drama value of a splash on the evening news or local rag. Quite where the Lockerbie campaigner fits into this is definitely a shade of grey.

[paulo]

The difficulty with this argument is that it suggests the media should have no right to 'interfere' in this particular industry.

Sometimes media behaviour in aviation matters is at best meaningless and at worst counterproductive.

But it is important fundamentally.

There are of course states where 'media problems' are 'contained'. I doubt their safety records make much of an advert for the control of criticism.

[bjcc]

As I recall the Lockabie relitive wasn't prosecuted. Procecution would have looked vindictive and not really been in the public interest. I think the same excuse goes for the press when they do thier smuggling attempts. Although taking a green plastic toy gun through BAA security isn't really an offence in any event. The idea being to show that something that looks like a gun can get through security.
As far as the UK is concerned, I can't comment on the rest of the world, the person asking another to take something through security doesn't commit an offence. Odd I know, but I went through this at Heathrow some 10 years ago, after getting out the Aviation Security Act and the newer Aviation and Maratime Security Acts niether myself or my inspector could find any offence we could charge someone with after a similar incident. Of course the person taking a package through, if he doesn't admit the package isn't his at the security questions stage does commit an offence.

[Send Clowns]

PAXBoy

The puny locks used on cases are actually of a lot of use. I would never go through some countries' airports without one. They do not prevent entry, they are too easily broken, however they do indicate that the luggage has been tampered with. They same applies to the lockable rucksack netting.

Of course this is much more likely to save you from drugs charges than a bomb: a typical trick in some far-Eastern and former-Soviet states is for someone to plant drugs in a person's checked luggage. This could be for one of two reasons. Either they wait for you to clear customs, unaware that you are a mule, then steal your luggage or else the customs are tipped off about you, and in the fuss as you are arrested their mule slips through. Either way in some countries you could be facing a long time in a nasty gaol.

Never let your baggage out of sight unless it is locked. If the lock is brocken, immediately inform some form of security personnel, before opening it! Say you are concerned about a bomb, this will get it dealt with at a higher level, involving more people than drugs, reducing the chances of anyone corrupt trying to pin something on you.

BJCC

Do you know if most of the imitation guns used in these 'tests' are plastic? If so then the reporters are faking the whole setup. There is only one gun that does not show up in a metal detector (a ceramic Glock), and that will show up on X-Ray so has to be carried on the person, so will easily be found on a search. It is an extremely expensive gun which is difficult to acquire. As far as I am aware it has never been implicated in a hijacking.

[Kalium Chloride]

There is only one gun that does not show up in a metal detector (a ceramic Glock)

This is, as far as I know, utter claptrap.

I don't know where Bruce Willis gets his information (because this stuff is almost certainly ripped off from one of the Die Hard movies and not from any authentic source) but there is no 'ceramic Glock'.

Glock pistols have components made of polymer (perhaps Mr Willis got his 'polymer' mixed up with 'porcelain' and no-one noticed) but much of the gun is steel and would easily be detected on airport X-ray.

So yes, a 'ceramic Glock' would be very difficult to acquire because it doesn't even exist. It's this kind of nonsense which then turns up in tabloids and gets taken as fact by the public. :rolleyes:

[apioca]

Another case where the answer to the "Could anyone of interfered with your bag since it was packed?"-question would have to be yes, is when transfering from one flight to another where your bags are not checked through:
IE A routing fromsomewhere-STN with Ryan Air to be followed by STN-somewhereelse by same company.

Flying that route you would have to answer Yes to the question!(the bag will have been out of your sight for hours in the hands of who knows!)
Then what happens? Do you unpack your bag in front of the check-in-guy/gal? Extra security check????

[bjcc]

Perhaps I should explain, the incident I am talking about was a couple of weeks ago, when some genius from the BBC program South Today took a childs toy, painted green and shaped llike and the size of an automatic pistol. It was contained the orginal packaging inside a carry on bag. It either did not show up on the x ray or was missed by the searcher, head of BAA security made the usual excuses, (mind you he was full of excuses while he was in charge of heathrow police station). However the point I was making was it would be difficult to prove an offence against the reporter, as possession of a kids toy is not illegal, no matter that his intention was to prove secuirity inadeqate.
As regards to clock pistols, I know very little but they did set off the metal detectors.

[Send Clowns]

I bow to superior Knowledge KC, a polymer gun. I seem now to recall a similar description, but I am no small arms expert. I realised the gun also contained metallic parts. However I suspect at times they are not detected by metal detectors, as the sensitivity certainly used to be set so that they were not set off by keys - though I notice in recent years they are more sensitive. In fact I went through two airports only in March with someone with a fair amount of metal embedded in her person and do not remember the metal detector going off (did it, if you are reading this?).

BJCC

I realised your point, and agree. I was simply curious.

In the case you mentioned I would suggest it would indicate no security breach. The lightweight plastic of a toy gun certainly woulod not show up on an X-Ray. If found in a search the weight would indicate it was not dangerous. Maybe a very minor security lapse if it was overlooked in a search (could be used to frighten people, though in the current climate not to hijack, as some people would risk their lives to stop a hijack now) but nothing in any way newsworthy :rolleyes:

[Kalium Chloride]

Modern metal detectors can be programmed to ignore common alloys in coins, etc, to cut down on nuisance alarms. The more advanced ones are also 'zoned' which means that several independent detectors are used to scan the head area, shoulders, chest, torso and so on. This means that a lot of small, randomly-distributed items of metal don't add up to a false "large item" signal.

Incidentally, Glock might not build ceramic guns but it's interesting that there's at least one airport metal detector company which highlights the fact that it can detect the Glock 17 - the implication being that this weapon is more difficult to pinpoint. I don't know whether that's a fact or whether it's using the false rumours about the Glock as a marketing tool.

[Eboy]

I suggest all airlines at the airport suspend advertising on the "journalists" station.

Regarding luggage, luggage handlers have been found to have keys to common cheap luggage locks (which are all the same). In addition, the hasps on those and some of the combination locks can be bent open and closed by hand, or using pliers.

Instead of standard locks I now use self-locking wiring ties, such as these . . .

http://www.1stcableties.com/

Can be bought in the electric section of hardware stores. Slip one through where the lock would go and zip it tight. It cannot be easily removed without cutting (which I do with small nail clippers I keep in an outside luggage pocket).

[Pandora]

Aaargh, Eboy!

Don't you know nail clippers are a banned item? You could potentially use them as an item of aggression against them aircraft crew. At least, that's what all the cabin and flight crew who have had their nail clippers confiscated have been told.

[Eboy]

I put the nail clippers in an unlocked pocket on the checked luggage. Anyway, a few months ago nail clippers were allowed by the TSA, at least for the U.S. Safety razors too. Now I can shave when I go to Asia again.

I checked the latest TSA list to make sure . . .

http://www.tsa.dot.gov/trav_consumers/permitted_items.shtm

I checked the prohibited list also . . .

http://www.tsa.dot.gov/trav_consumers/aircraft_prohibit.shtm

I think this list is somewhat misleading in that it is items "that will not be allowed through the security checkpoint" and "items prohibited in aircraft cabins." The implication is you can check this stuff. I guess that is where the FAA and airline rules take over. But, I think the TSA should rewrite this misleading page -- the ill- and/or uninformed could get the wrong idea. They should also hire a graphic artist to redo those cheesy gold badges and patches.

[Final 3 Greens]

Went through CRL last with with the Ryans and security stopped me and insisted that I empty my brifecase.

When they couldn't find anything, they showed me the screen image and a lose AA battery (at a slight angle) looked like a small penkife. Once they were shown the battery, all was okay.

As I was repacking the bag, I commented that it was reassuring to see their diligence, they said "yes, well you might have been a some smart ass journalist trying to make us look like fools."

My first reaction was irritation, as these people should be looking after our safety, not engaging in CYA, but on reflection perhaps journalists do play a valuable role by keeping the security guys on their toes.

[sharpshot]

I consider that in all walks of life you will find the good, bad and indifferent - why should journalists be any different?

Why are they allowed to "get away" with testing airport security?
My point is that said Journalist is able to "test" and if caught, turn round and admit to being what he / she is.........what happens when you get the journalist that's turned bad or been a mole??
He /she gets on plane and could do the business.

Please - start treating them like anyone else who tries to break the law.

[Konkordski]

You could ask yourself whether you'd prefer that the person who discovers that you can sneak through slack security is a reporter or someone prepared to kill another 3000 people.

[Covenant]

Hmm, looking at the "prohibited item" list from the TSA web site, I notice the inclusion of automatic weapons and hand grenades, but the omission of RPG launchers, AMRAAM missiles and M-1 Abrams Tanks. Maybe someone should bring this to their attention? :D

[OFBSLF]

There is only one gun that does not show up in a metal detector (a ceramic Glock), and that will show up on X-Ray so has to be carried on the person, so will easily be found on a search. It is an extremely expensive gun which is difficult to acquire. As far as I am aware it has never been implicated in a hijacking.

Could you point to a reference to this mythical gun?

I have two Glocks (Glock 17 -- 9mm, and Glock 23 -- .40 S&W). There's no ceramic in them. The frame itself is polymer (aka plastic), but the action parts within the frame are steel, as are the rails which hold the slide. The slide is steel, as is recoil spring. The guide rod is plastic. The magazines are plastic, but have steel liners. The barrel is, of course, steel as well. The cartridges, of course, are made up of brass cases and lead projectiles (usually jacketed with copper).

The plastic used in the Glock frame is dense enough that it shows up quite well in X-rays. And the steel in the slide, barrel, etc. would set off the metal detector.

While I've heard people claim that there are undetectable ceramic guns, no one has ever coughed up any evidence of one and they certainly aren't for sale here in the states. I've come to believe that they exist only in the Tom Clancy novels and the like.

And, of course, Glock is not the only manufacturer to make handguns with plastic frames, though they may well have been the first. Heckler-Koch, Smith & Wesson, Walther, Kahr, etc. all offer plastic-framed guns.

OFBSLF

[Kalium Chloride]

OFBSLF,

Think you'll find we discounted the "ceramic" gun earlier in this thread...

[arcniz]

The "Glockenspiel" is nice, but one can imagine that a college-level mischief-maker trained in any of four or five technical disciplines could fairly easily make from scratch a 1500+ fps one- or two- or three-shot with nary a bit of metal or ceramic.

If you accept that the troublemakers are "crazy" from our pov to begin, then it is folly to assume conventional behavior will follow.

There's no easy here...for us.