Bomb in shoe joke lands AF pilot in hot water

[LatviaCalling]

Kind of a stupid thing to do in these jittery times, even though it was a joke. Professional pilots should not joke when it comes to security people with empty craniums. The following from BBC.

---


Pilot held over air 'joke'

The Paris-bound flight was delayed as a result of the incident
An Air France pilot has been arrested at New York's John F Kennedy Airport after reportedly joking at a security checkpoint that he had a bomb in his shoes.

A Port Authority spokeswoman said the pilot was detained after making what she described as an inappropriate remark.

The pilot, who was not identified, was later charged with falsely reporting an incident. Flight AF009, which had been due to leave New York late on Friday, was delayed as a result and 350 passengers had to stay in local hotels overnight.

The flight eventually left for Paris Charles de Gaulle airport after a new co-pilot flew in from Paris, an Air France spokesman in Paris told BBC News Online.

The airline said the pilot had been arrested following "misinterpreted remarks". A witness told the French news agency AFP that the man had jokingly referred to a bomb in his shoes as he passed through security.

Airport police detained him and he is due to appear before a judge, as early as Sunday, on charges which could result in a jail term of up to 11 years, the agency said.

[Rollingthunder]

I'm less surprised when smart ass idiot civilians, who just don't get it, make these kind of comments in airports, but astounded that a pilot would. What the bloody hell was he thinking?

[pilgrim]

A very unprofessional remark if it,s true, and a very over zealous security officer, me thinks a caution from a police officer and a talking too from his (the pilot,s) captain would have done the job, the media loves this kind of behaviour and it will harm our industry no end. I am sure Air France boss,es will not be amused

[Tripower455]

Well, if the pilot wasn't subject to needless, PASSENGER screening, then this wouldn't happen!

[PlaneTruth]

Right On Tripower!

Last month while going through security, a novice X-Ray technician zeroed in on my miniature break-apart screwdriver (the same on I have carried for 18+ months and never been stopped for -about 1 inch long). "I'll have to ask the supervisor on this one he said. I gathered up my stuff and wandered over to the super's podium. The super looked at me and gave me a wry smile and said, "I can say something you cannot. The most deadly weapons you have are your hands."

(I wanted to ask him if he had ridden through a couple of my landings....) "You are absolutely right," I said.

Then he added, "Another pilot came through here in uniform with a "tool" and after questioning him I let him go. The guy immediately called the FAA and ratted me out for letting him through with the tool and then they called the TSA and in 15 minutes my ass was on the hotseat." I asked him if he gives this guy a ton of grief everytime he shows up. He certainly deserves it.

It is true: We are sometimes our own worst enemies. Or, as Pogo said, "We have met the enemy and it is us."

Damned fool morons!

PT

[Konkordski]

Professional pilots should not joke when it comes to security people with empty craniums.


Am I missing something here? A pilot treats the touchy issue of airline security as a joke (and I'm inclined to write 'with contempt') and it's the security personnel who are the ones with "empty craniums"?

If a passenger had said this "as a joke" I suspect the pilots on this forum would be baying for his blood. Does it only become a harmless joke when it's one of your own?

In any case, why do people still think that the "bomb in the luggage" joke is funny? It's not. It's unoriginal and it's pathetic. :mad:

[LatviaCalling]

Konkordski,

Don't get your bowels in an uproar. What the pilot did was utterly stupid, but we all know that you don't joke with border guards, immigration officials, or airport security personnel.

What I meant by "empty craniums" is that in the U.S. at least, many of the security people are still about three sandwiches short of a picnic. Even if they are federalized, many are still the same who worked for the private firms and we all know their IQ levels and pay scales.

So, the lesson is, look serious. Don't protest and don't even mention the fact that you have 15 dwarf Kurds in your pocket. Even though that would be an exaggeration, you would probably be put through enough grilling that you would miss your flight and face possible arrest for "willfully" doing something illegal.

In the case of the AF pilot, the company suffered a great deal. It had to put up 350 people in hotels, transport them back and forth and feed them. Plus, they had to fly in another driver. (Can't see why AF didn't have a few reserve pilots on standby at JFK).

[cargo boy]

This just goes to prove that the cosmetic security measures that we have in place is being run by moronic imbeciles. If the TSA monkeys can't figure out that the operating crew, in uniform, are trying to be humorous or more likely trying to make a point that the charade of this pathetic security system that's in place then we, collectively as aircrew need to make a point.

How many terrorists have they winkled out with this security? How many terrorists ae going to admit they are carrying a bomb in their shoe? Someone here needs to a real kick up their @rse and it's not the pilot! Some of you who are shrieking with outrage at the foolishness of the pilot are either pompous w@nkers or so far up your own backsides that you have lost the plot.

I would suggest a campaign, preferably organised by IFALPA, that one a given date every one of us who is operating that day, in uniforum, jokes that we have a bomb in our shoe and watch the airline industry grind to a halt within a few hours. You'd soon see the politicians trembling at the outrage from their travelling voters giving them hell over some of the crap we have to put up with every time we try to board our aircraft for work.

If the TSA chimp couldn't figure out that a joke was being made, a joke aimed at the futility of the situation that the pilot doesn't actually need any bomb or weapon to take out his or her aircraft, then that plonker needs their head examining. To insinuate that the pilot faces a possible prison sentence of up to 11 years and all the trouble caused by this joke called the TSA goes to show the absurdity of the situation. As stated in another thread elsewhere, these TSA monkeys think irony is something you prescribe to an anaemic!

Let's see how many pompous idiots jump in here and fail to stand behind this Air France pilot. The rest of us who are pilots should be the first to see the irony of a uniformed pilot reporting for work claiming he has a bomb in his shoe and a sh!t for brain TSA monkey totally missing the point.

[Konkordski]

LatviaCalling:

Sorry - nothing personal.

I'm just fuming after coming out of another discussion on the same subject, where everyone seemed ready to crucify the security guard for being a jobsworth and pin a medal on the pilot for his hardship.

Having read your additional comments above, though, I have to say I agree with you.

Maybe what's needed is security guards with a greater vested interest in doing the job properly.

[M.Mouse]

Like many pilots I accept the quite absurd screening that I have to go through with resigned boredom.

I am regularly 'frisked' for setting off the extraordinarily variably sensitive arches that we must pass through. My attire varies little but some I walk through with not a bleep and others go off as though I was armed from head to toe.

What I find quite astonishing is the complete refusal to acknowledge the fact that I don't need a weapon to take control of the aeroplane....I already have control!

It is also a littler irritating to observe a general attitude from those in charge in the US that terrorism is a new phenomenon.

The rest of the world has been dealing with it for decades.

[LatviaCalling]

Cargo Boy,

I still maintain that it was stupid for the pilot to say he had a bomb in his shoes or shoe. Bells ring and flags go up at those kind of statements. What if he was a terrorist dressed as a pilot with all the credentials?

My second statement was that these security people are not the brightest of the lot, so therefore, I would not joke with them at all. Period.

Konkordsky,

It was the heat of the moment when you use the mail instead of being face to face. Cheers, mate.

[STS]

Not exactly the same, but I remember being with a colleague at LHR post 9/11 and we were going through the usual staff security checks on our way to board a flight. Apparently our staplers were very threatening items. We thought it was a joke. Apparently not. Super called. We explained we needed then to staple coupons, whole terminal would grind to halt overwhelmed by bits of loose paper floating about, where on earth can we leave them that's convenient when dashing about from landside to airside? He was very reasonable, and we got through no problem. But it could have been awkward because of an over zealous twit. From that shift on, I thought it more prudent to keep my trap shut infront of them and just get on with it.

[Maxflyer]

Rolling thunder, you show a great disdain for the fare paying public with your high and mighty comment smart ass idiot civilians. From that I take it that the military are now providing a passenger service!

What company do you fly for? I'll make sure my hard earnt cash doesn't go to it in future.

[LatviaCalling]

Maxflyer,

I would have to agree with Rolling Thunder about the "smart ass idiot civilians."

Although I don't pilot my own aircraft anymore, I do fly quite often and it amazes me what these vacationers try to take into the cabin. Samurai swords, switchblades and BB pistols "for my son" who'll be sitting right beside me, so don't worry.

Don't they read newspapers or watch TV to know what is allowed or not. Even at the gate check-in you have the option to drop your metal nail files and scissors into a bag and they will be checked into the hold.

No, these people have no idea what is going on and then start raising hell when an item is taken away from them. I'm sad to say that a colleague of mine bought a 16-piece stainless steeel Solingen knife set at the Hamburg airport and tried to take it aboard.

The bells and whistles went off and the Germans did not confiscate the bootly, but put it into a special Lufthansa bag and sent it downstairs where he collected it in Riga. Others have not been so lucky.

I guess after all this rambling, the point is that the average Joe Shmoe has no bloody idea what airport security is all about, despite the warnings, posters and other information. All he knows is that you better take your pocket change out so it does not activate the buzzer.

[Tripower455]

I agree that it is stupid to argue with the goons, and make silly comments whilst in hearing range of them.

My issue is with the fact that we are screened at all.

Out of all of the various employee groups on the airfield, why screen the only employee group that doesn't need a weapon to take over the airplane?

Newhire ramp employees breeze in the back door without so much as a glance from the dreaded tsA, yet, an airline Captain, who is going to take over an airplane (whether or not he has a screwdriver), are walking to work with no shoes on and getting berated by HS dropouts.

Either flightcrew are trusted, or we are not. If we are not trusted, then we should not be given complete control of a potential WMD...........

If we are trusted, then we should not be standing at work in our socks, while a HS dropout rifles our baggage, looking for toiltries and small tools to pilfer.

[cyrano_de_bergerac]

Tripower455,

Your argument is only valid if a pilot only had access to his/her individual aircraft. Once beyond security gates, that is not the case.

Sure it seems assinine to hassle a pilot over scissors, etc., when he will shortly be sitting next to a fire axe, and in command and control of a passenger-laden craft. But surely you can see how any employee group, if routinely not screened, has the potential to smuggle firearms/explosives for distribution to comrades in the secure area, for taking control of multiple aircraft.

I don't see terrorists and any employee group being mutually exclusive. If ramp employees are for some reason considered such, I fail to see the logic. Especially considering that a would-be terrorist would find it much easier attaining such a job.

Airport security is indeed a bit of a joke, both for ridiculous policies in some cases, as well as having to deal with the rent-a-cop screeners. Same mentality as the as the mall security guard, or nightclub security 'bouncer', etc. ... they love being the big fish in their little pond at times.

Still...noone should be 'trusted' to the point of coming and going as they please.

[Eboy]

Maxflyer, I don't think Rolling thunder is intending to show great disdain toward all the flying public. I think he (or she) refers to some, and I would agree. A few passengers, indeed, have their act together. Rolling thunder has been a helpful contributor in the Passengers and SLF forum.

[Rollingthunder]

Indeed. I have great respect for the vast majority of pax. They do indeed pay for all our operations. It is the few idiots that I have no patience for anymore because they never seem to learn and are always out there. "Civilian" in this context is meant as non-staff.

[prattbrat]

I'm less surprised when smart ass idiot civilians (non-staff) , who just don't get it, make these kind of comments in airports, but astounded that a pilot would. What the bloody hell was he thinking


Ahhh, so there you have it. You just found out pilots are as dumb as any commoner.
Take’m off the high pedestal you put them on and you’ll discover their **** stinks just like yours.

[robmac]

Cargo Boy

Your remarks are right on the money, perfect comments, 10/10.

I make my crust as a security consultant, mainly in third world countries with various terrorist and other problems.

Business is good enough to keep my expensive personal twin prop in the air, even at SE Asia maintenance rates.

The enemy of good security is lack of imagination, lateral thinking, and prompt decisive individual action at the right times.

Most of the TSA screeners fall well short of that standard I am afraid.

I was astounded last year at Miami Intl to see a United Captain getting turned over big style at the security point. I asked the screener if he really thought that the captain was a terrorist, and even if he was, what was the point of searching him for a weapon as he would shortly be flying it :( :* :*

In fact I had a sudden humerous image of the captain pulling out a gun, holding it against his head and saying "take me to Cuba or the skygod gets it !!!!!!

Of course the reaction of the screener was :mad: :mad: :mad:

One final point, when they start arming crew (another strange manoevre), I hope they remember to tell the screeners or there could be a few shocks at security:D

robmac

[Anthony Carn]

The Security organisations, in my experience, display warnings at checkpoints to the effect that "Security Is Not a Joke" and "All Statements Will Be Taken Seriously". If they don't all do this, then they can only expect misunderstandings.

If the pilot in question's employer had'nt trained him in this aspect and if warnings were not displayed at the Security point in question, then you'd have to give him the benefit of the doubt.

Otherwise, he qualifies as an unbelievable idiot, does he not ?

The Security Authorities have certainly achieved one of their objectives !..........the message has spread - "Don't joke with Security Personnel !"

[Rollingthunder]

Pedestal? In truth, perhaps. I have respect for any true professional, especially those who deal skillfully with complex events in dangerous environments (read: any flight). In any group there will be some prats.

Usually I prefer to put women on a pedestal, and look up their skirts.

[robmac]

anthony

Have to disagree with you, if security is to be effective, no forms of normal social interaction should be discouraged. If we encourage everyone to act in a certain standard, uncommunicative and unnatural manner, then we actually make it easier for a highly stressed individual to pass unnoticed.

[Mac the Knife]

Who screens the screeners? Or could anyone with the right uniform, a faked pass and some knowledge of the setup turn up for work and slip a previously unarmed pax a weapon?

[G-ALAN]

Remeber it takes 2 pilots sometimes 3 to fly an airliner. If one pilot tries to take over aircraft to turn it into a WMD I'm pretty sure the others will try to stop him or her unless they are also in on it. Logical solution : put bomb in shoe and blow the thing to pieces then no one will be able to stop you. Now ask yourself what if this was the case with the AF pilot? what if the security guard let him pass and he blew the aircraft to bits somewhere over the pond? what would happen to said security officer? It would be him facing jail. The guy was just doing his job, you can hardly blame him for covering his own @rse.

Ok the security officer probably didn't look at it from this point of view but it's a hypothetical situation.

[cargo boy]

Come on! Get real. If the Air France pilot had a bomb in his shoe and intended to get around the 'two or more' pilots in the cockpit concept you are throwing around then why would he announce it to the TSA amoeba? You are missing the whole point just like the TSA dipstick did.

Following your logic that every scenario has to be a possibility you might as well never leave your home because apart from the possibility that you may be subject to terrorism you are also far more likely to be killed on the way to the airport by another brainless TSA monkey driving recklessly.

As robmac has stated, if you try for some form of conformity without the usual giveaway tell-tale signs that would put stress on someone with harmful intent then how are you going to notice it. Not that those TSA tosspots would figure out how to deal with that.

All the rest of the discussion about pax trying to board with knives or whatever, that doesn't matter. You only have to worry about those who have malicious intent and there is almost nothing in the presennt security system to prevent them from boarding. Don't forget, they don't nead sophisticated weapons either, just a nice glass bottle of highly flammable Cognac would do. If you can't turn that into a weapon then you deserve to be caught.

Cracking a joke about the irony of the situation to a brain dead loser and getting arrested for it shows how the mental patients have taken over the asylum. :*

[CarltonBrowne the FO]

After 1988, all staff had to be scanned; I have no objection to it, but it makes no sense if all staff aren't subject to it.
The way it was explained at my last company was like this: as pass holders, whether aircrew or ground employees, we are trusted. However, if it became known that any employee group were able to enter the secure areas unsearched, those employees' families could be held hostage to force an honest employee to take something airside.
By searching me, the security staff are causing me a few seconds of inconvenience- but protecting my family from harm.
PS. In the UK, the maximum penalty for "joking" that you have a bomb in your luggage is seven years imprisonment. He should have known better; I wonder if he still has a job?

[mono]

Just a small point here but from my experience of going through US/Canadian security Security ask for shoes to be removed if they cause the detector to beep. (I wear steel toe caps for work) Perhaps this hapless pilots' shoes caused the dreaded beep a metal buckle perhaps and upon being asked to remove his shoes replied in faltering english 'what you think there is a bomb in there?' Where upon he was clapped in irons. Easily done you know!!!

[garp]

Two observations
1/ The Air France F/O (50 years old) probably does not speak English very fluently which more than likely created more confusion and misunderstanding. I can imagine that when he realised that things were going sour he tried to calm down the security staff member in a rather clumsy way.
2/ I can see the grin on the face of the security staff involved. Finally we have a frog that we can stick on our fork. The anti-French atmosphere must still be around after the Iraq war.
Too far fetched?

[OldAg84]

As SLF let me weigh in-

First- the AF crewmember deserves what he got- as does anybody who jokes- the signs are posted and very clear. Lack of command of English is the worst possible excuse.

How often do aircrew fly with members they don't know well? If you can't guarantee that a crew member won't "drop" or put something in a locker, then stop complaining about security. The object is the creation of a "clean & secure" area. That means everybody gets screened. I thought we were all in this "together".

I'm also tired of airlines and their employees who act like they are doing me a favor for letting me PAY for transport. When I fly tomorrow it will be on a low fare carrier who wants my business and treats me with respect. Just so you know- between security- which I'm not fond of either-but understand the need for and the cr@p service, as well as the obscene fare (non-stop) to where I'm going I almost drove the 9 hours instead of flying.

[robmac]

Back to cargo Boys eminently sensible remarks. There are so many scenarios that if you want to be paranoid, don't leave home, and even then an out of control bus will probably demolish it and kill you.

What G-ALAN has inadvertently highlit, is that the USA seems to be driven by CYA than combatting a realistic threat.

What if a real terrorist had gotten through while TSA and the police were busy focusing their attention on a Pilot (for christs sake !!!)


Carltonbrowne, I imagine the 7 years is for the tosser who actually intends harm, by making a malicious false bomb threat.

For my money garp has hit on the only logical motive for this pantomime performance, strange about the pilot being French, isn't it ?

robmac

[Huck]

Once I enter a screening area I will nod or shake my head but I refuse to utter one word, other than "get your supervisor." Three major airline pilots in this country have lost their jobs for comments made, and the AF FO will probably be number four.

Yes, everyone needs to be screened. What gets up my nose is when pilots are "randomly" chosen for gate screening. I deadheaded on a flight out of KMIA one morning, got the SSSS curse on my boarding pass, and stood in line for my special treatment. In line with me were a World guy and a Polar guy. So... the only 3 out of ~100 to be "randomly" searched passengers were deadheading pilots - each of us with a 10 year FBI background check and fingerprint screening!

Let's all go reread "Catch-22" - becoming more and more a non-fiction book....

[CarltonBrowne the FO]

I get screened every working day. They recognise me at security, so if anything they possibly relax a little too much: my briefcase must look pretty jumbled, what with a headset, pens, a clipboard (lotsn of metal clips on it), calculator, sometimes a small square lump of organic material (we have to bring our own meals :rolleyes: )... they rarely stop me, although sometimes the x-ray operator stops the belt at my case, long enough to see whose it is.
When they ask to look inside my bag, or to frisk me, I smile, say "Sure" and do as I'm told. It's over very quickly, and the security staff never hassle me. Of course, this is in an environment where all staff have been searched for nearly 15 years (since 21 December 1988 in fact). As for the US: hopefully, if they stop getting a rise out of pilots, the screeners on a power-trip will lose interest in giving you grief eventually...
I don't mean any of the above as a dig at the US; the searches are never going to stop, but if you obviously don't mind, they'll leave you alone and hassle your grumpy old captain instead! :D

[Tripower455]

Tripower455,

Your argument is only valid if a pilot only had access to his/her individual aircraft. Once beyond security gates, that is not the case.

OK, so if I were hell bent on causing problems with an airplane, it would make more sense to try and commandeer a different airplane than the one I was assigned?

Sure it seems assinine to hassle a pilot over scissors, etc., when he will shortly be sitting next to a fire axe, and in command and control of a passenger-laden craft.

It seems asinine, because it IS asinine.

But surely you can see how any employee group, if routinely not screened, has the potential to smuggle firearms/explosives for distribution to comrades in the secure area, for taking control of multiple aircraft.

I sure do. It's been done (PSA 1771), but NOT by a pilot (yet, ironically, as a result of that heinous mass murder, by a ground ops employee, pilots and FA's are the only employees that get screened).

I believe it's different elsewhere, but in the states, the only employees that are required to be screened are non SIDA employees, and flight crew. Every other employee (including those with entry level ramp/ops positions) on the airport walks in the back door. I will repeat my question: Does it make sense to screen the ONLY employees who don't need a weapon to "take over" an aircraft, while letting most of the others in the back door? Let me put it another way. Who would the average person place more trust in, an airline captain with many years of verifiable experience in aviation, or a new hire baggage handler?

I don't see terrorists and any employee group being mutually exclusive. If ramp employees are for some reason considered such, I fail to see the logic. Especially considering that a would-be terrorist would find it much easier attaining such a job.

My point exacly.

Airport security is indeed a bit of a joke, both for ridiculous policies in some cases, as well as having to deal with the rent-a-cop screeners. Same mentality as the as the mall security guard, or nightclub security 'bouncer', etc. ... they love being the big fish in their little pond at times.

100% accurate statement!

Still...noone should be 'trusted' to the point of coming and going as they please.

Well, many are, and the few that aren't, should be, IMHO..

[wagtail23]

............been laughing at some of these remarks:D

Question: does anyone KNOW what the AF pilot actually said? No? thought not.

So how can we judge wether or not he deserved it.

Question: does anyone know if the security chap understood what the AF pilot actually said? No? thought not.

Agreed: IF the AF pilot made a remark stating that he had a bomb in his shoes and it was understood that way the he is a right :mad:

BUT, you're talking about the good ole USA where second raters take an over zealous approach to an important job, ( I have experienced this technique there many a time) and the anti-french feeling may well have hightened a red-neck's attitude to the anyone from that part of the world. (NO I am not saying that the security chap WAS/IS a red-neck, just listing the posibilities)

When checking through the security in to / out of USA, I keep my mouth shut, answer Yes/No if possible and I am always polite because I know that this very thing could happen if any security chap/chapess got out of bed the wrong side that morning and wanted to make a point. (The childlike 'I have more power than you do' type of thing):{

And by the way, even with two flight deck members, it only takes one to keep the flight deck door locked when the other goes for a p**s. So it is still feasible for just one pilot to turn his aircraft into a WMD

Happy landings all, off for a sim ride and hope I dont get stuck in security with my Leatherman multi-tool:\

[PaperTiger]

strange about the pilot being French, isn't it ?I doubt the average Noo Yawk TSA genius could tell the pilot's nationality just from his accent. Recognized him as a furriner (=highly likely to be a terrorist) for sure, and no doubt treated him accordingly.
Rivere was at a security checkpoint Friday at John F. Kennedy International Airport when he allegedly said he had a bomb in his shoe, Port Authority spokesman Tony Ciavolella said. Ciavolella would not say whether Rivere could have been joking. Well of course he could be joking or p!ssed off (and undoubtedly was), so why dismiss the possibility ? Zero tolerance = zero common sense. :mad: dolts.

[CowboyEngineer]

I have believed the common view here that's it's silly to search pilots, since they're the one controlling the airplane, have access to the crash axe, etc.

However, Cyrano makes an important point: The pilot could deliver guns, weapons, etc. to another player past the security checkpoint.

A fictional scenario IF pilots weren't searched: Air Egypt pilot, (who happens to be a closet Islamic Fundi radical in his spare time) smuggles guns into the boarding gate area at JFK. Passes gun(s) off to other radicals who then board an American Airlines flight and hijacks it to oblivion.

Or, substitute an American pilot whose family is being held hostage at home by bad guys ("give this package to Mr. X or your kids get it")

It's easy for us to screen/investigate American pilots, baggage handlers, etc. Mystifies me why we don't screen ground personnel. I guess they made a determination that the foreign pilot Islamic threat was greater than domestic Islamic threat.

But we have no control whatsoever over the pilots that fly to the states. The TSA guys are probably very frustrated over their inability to screen the foreign pilots that fly into New York. Any Saudi airline pilot could steer the plane into the Statue of Liberty before we could warm up an F-16's engine.

So the best we can do is screen ALL pilots in hopes of stopping a foreign pilot from giving weapons to others in the boarding area. We can't just screen foreign pilots. That would be un-PC.

[604guy]

It has been with some interest and bemusement that I have been reading some of the input to this thread.

Surely, the screener was complying with his or her regulations utilizing the training and parameters that have been provided to them by their employer. (Which I guess now is the United States federal government) What is there to gain by vilifying this individual for allegedly doing their job? As others have pointed out I suspect that a language and or cultural difference may be at the root of the problem on this occasion. I am giving the benefit of doubt to a professional flight crewmember that he would know better than to intentionally make jokes of this nature.

If people have a problem with the screening, or some aspects of it, then it is those that legislate and enforce the system that should come under fire. There is not a politician out there however that would think of retreating from the current system. But you also must remember what the whole screening process (and similar measures) is for. The whole exercise is merely for public consumption. It is meant to appease the travelling public that “big brother” is looking after you. The reality is however, that any person(s) bent on mal intent will always know the where, when and how and that gives those individuals the advantage every time. Short of a police state there is not much that can be done about that.

Like screening or not it’s today’s reality. Deal with it, get over it and move on

[Tripower455]

However, Cyrano makes an important point: The pilot could deliver guns, weapons, etc. to another player past the security checkpoint.

Armed LEOS, can too. So can rampers, cleaners, gate agents, provisioners, etc.

A fictional scenario IF pilots weren't searched: Air Egypt pilot, (who happens to be a closet Islamic Fundi radical in his spare time) smuggles guns into the boarding gate area at JFK. Passes gun(s) off to other radicals who then board an American Airlines flight and hijacks it to oblivion.

Here's a factual scenario. Ground ops folks aren't searched (even now). On 12/7/1987, a recently fired USAir ground ops person uses his unsurrendered ID to go in the back door at LAX with a 44 magnum. He boards PSA flight 1771 as a revenue pax, which, by no coincidence, the ex supervisor that fired him is also on. After takeoff, Mr. ground ops gets up, kills his boss, breaks into the cockpit, kills both pilots, then himself, while horrified passengers look on. The BAC 146 breaks up as it approaches mach 1, and little bits of aluminum, plastic and 50+ people rain down on Paso Robles CA. As a result of this incident, passengers understandably cried for better security.

What they got was:

Airline Employees must surrender their ID when they are no longer employed by the airline (Makes perfectly good sense)

Individual Airports had to come up with an FAA approved SIDA (secure ID access) plan for all employees that have access to the ramp (Another good idea, if done correctly)

And, finally, Pilots and flight attendants (but, ironically, not ground ops folks) must submit to passenger screening. (makes absolutely NO sense when viewed in context)

At first, the reason given for the last part was that since pilots and fa's travel to many airports, and SIDA badges are only issued for individual airports, then they couldn't be verified as employees due to the differences in the SIDA programs around the nation. ALPA and other unions tried for YEARS to get some sort of universal SIDA ID for flight crews, especially since we not only go through the local SIDA procedure at our bases, we are much more thoroughly vetted as aircrew to begin with. Why we are still not provided with some sort of biometric ID is beyond me, given the damage that can be done if someone is able to impersonate a pilot all the way to the cockpit. Even Disney World uses biometrics to identify annual pass holders.

IMHO, the reason that we have not gotten any type of universal aircrew ID is due to the eyewash factor of having flight crews screened in front of passengers. Many folks see an easily recognized, authority figure going through the same rigamorole as they are, and conclude that things must be really secure, if they are even checking the pilots (never giving the unseen minions on the ramp/behind the gate podiums, in ops, in provisioning, in mx, cleaners etc etc etc, a second thought).

Or, substitute an American pilot whose family is being held hostage at home by bad guys ("give this package to Mr. X or your kids get it")

Why not just do the same to one of the numerous, armed leo's that are constantly riding around on airliners?

It's easy for us to screen/investigate American pilots, baggage handlers, etc. Mystifies me why we don't screen ground personnel. I guess they made a determination that the foreign pilot Islamic threat was greater than domestic Islamic threat.

I agree that it would be easy to screen ground ops folks, and I am also mystified as to why they are still not screened. As I watched the news on 9/11, my very first thought when the second plane hit was that a ground ops type smuggled weapons into the secure area in BOS. In actuality, they might have done just that. Just because they COULD have carried box cutters on board doesn't mean that they did. Why call attention to yourself like that when your brother can get a job as a cleaner, and place them under a garbage bag in a restroom in the terminal, minimizing the risk of having to carry them past "security"?


IMHO, the only reason that we are still screened has all to do with eyewash and public perception. Ironically, all screening crews does is inconvenience the paying passengers even more when 10 flightcrew jump to the front of the long "security" lines.

[kfw]

I wonder how much the stress of being locked up in the flt deck had on this .

You see crew getting peed off all the time , our jobs are no longer secure and the terrorists are after us . The AF pilot should claim stress , take 6 months off ( paid ) come back and sue the TSA for causing some of the stress in the first place .

Plenty of people go thru security without being searched so the argument of taking something thru and handing it to someone else is flawed .

[VFE]

Must admit to being slightly appalled at the holier than thou remarks being posted here by people pretending to be whiter than white. Oh to be perfect eh!

A similar scenario nearly happened to me when I was checking in for a flight from MCO to LGW last year. When asked if there were any dangerous items inside my baggage my French flying instructor friend who was seeing me off joked: "good job you don't have that rocket launcher in your suitcase still VFE!" :eek:

Now my arse nearly dropped and I gave the prat one helluva an evil I can tell you. The check in staff member looked concerned for a moment and then carried on checking my baggage. I don't think she actually heard my mate to be honest otherwise I'm pretty sure it woulda been 'touch-your-toes-time' for VFE that day. Thank god it wasn't persued otherwise I might still be jammed up in the USA or who knows - maybe even Guantanamo Bay! ;)

This Air France pilot made an ill-judged crack just like my French flying instructor mate did. I know it was inappropriate but for someone to post here that they "deserve all they get" is a tad Draconian to say the least. Seems like some security staff are hell bent on coming 'the big I am' when it comes to pilot security which is sad when you think about as it's most probably born out of jealousy at the end of the day.

I'm not saying security should be relaxed for one minute but for gods sake use discretion and be mature about it. I feel sorry for the Air France guy, he'll probably lose his job, house, and maybe even his licence as a result of blurting out an ill thought wise crack.

Very sorry tale indeed and a lesson for us all - SLF included.

VFE.

[newarksmells]

The pilot was arrainged today on 2 Felony counts and IF found guilty faces up to 11 years in jail. He is currently free on $7,500 bail with his next appearance on August 22nd...

And now for my personal thoughts...

How was security to know he was a real pilot? Forged papers and uniforms are very easy to get. But in reading your comments, the majority of posters seem to think security was wrong to hold this guy...presumably because of language difficulties. Has everybody forgot about the Middle-Eastern co-pilot who cut the engines while the Pilot went to the bathroom?

And I know comments like security personnel have a low IQ, are rednecks etc are prevalent here...just from reading the posts. If that's true, they're still smarter than the pilot. They slept in their own bed last night. And if the security folks are so stupid, who translated Shoe Bomb from French to English for them?

Let's face it, this particular piot was stupid beyond belief. If he wasn't, he wouldn't be facing 2 felony charges like he is now. And that is AFTER the evidence has been provided to a judge.

Newark

[paulo]

Are there any airports that choose not to screen people in 'convincing' outfits?

:ooh: :ooh: :ooh:

[bluecrane]

The solution is proper identification. If it is possible to identify a skymarshal and let him get onboard with his gun, it must be possible to identify a flight deck crewmember and let them through without a big security show.

Thought number 2: What would the reaction be, if the same thing had happened to a US crew in Paris?

[prattbrat]

I have respect for any true professional, especially those who deal skillfully with complex events in dangerous environments (read: any flight). In any group there will be some prats.

I see, the guy (read prat) conducted himself professionally while dealing skillfully in a dangerous environment by joking he had a bomb in his shoes. That one was a complex event.


No wonder you have respect for him. (pun intended)
:O

Usually I prefer to put women on a pedestal, and look up their skirts.

:ok: :ok:

[Tripower455]

Identification is the key
The solution is proper identification. If it is possible to identify a skymarshal and let him get onboard with his gun, it must be possible to identify a flight deck crewmember and let them through without a big security show.



Absolutely! This is the crux of the issue, and has been for almost 15 years.........

[newarksmells]

how do you account for false paperwork, IDs and uniforms if anybody who looks like a pilot is allowed to bypass security?

The fact they caught a pilot who now has 2 felonies against him and who will probably end up on the Darwin Awards is immaterial.

What's to stop a potential terrorist dressing like a pilot with fake IDs and bypassing security according to the posts i have just read?

Newark

[Loose rivets]

Some time ago, wrote a light hearted comment on the early days of airport security. Sadly, what I experience and read about now, makes me glad that I had the best of days: this bullying by wannabe police officers has become wholly unacceptable.

A while back a U.S. airline had a luckless passenger that made the mistake of saying that (his friend's) violin?-case, contained a machine gun. It was an obvious reference to the days of Capone, and was the unguarded - and no doubt foolish - words of an ordinary nervous passenger. Bravado shows itself in strange ways, but this does not make this young chap a potential hijacker. When he had gained his freedom, the airline told him that he was banned for life. He is probably still paying back the fine.

The security people, the police and the airline, had no right whatsoever in treating this man as they did. There is no doubt in my mind, that had he had the wherewithal (hard cash ) to take this to the higher echelons of the legal profession, he could have successfully fought, and won, a case on the grounds of violation of human rights. Sending a man to jail - even just police cells - for a nervous joke, is not on.

In the case of the AF pilot: well, he clearly should have known better. But to haul him off - to the determent of hundreds of passengers - is nothing short of crazy...who are they punishing? It seems to me, that the answer is everyone...except the bas****s that are guilty of a crime. Okay, we must never forget the bewildering horror of 9/11, but the answer is the same: we must not punish a continuous stream of innocent passengers and hard working aircrew.

It takes a long time to become a police officer, and even then it takes the wisdom of Solomon to be a good one. We cannot allow this continued bullying of aircrew by inexperienced (to put it politely) "officers" to continue. When I wrote the original comment, I suggested that we should not hurt the investors and operators by inappropriate action. Now I am suggesting, that not to take very determined action, will ultimately hurt the industry a great deal more.

Clearly the first line of attack must be via a stepped up effort on the part of the Pilots, c/c and engineer's unions. They have done good work on safety issues in the past, with the rider that they, as a band of people, tend to be rather....and I'm struggling for a good word here.....gentlemanly. We have to have an established set of rules governing aircrew access to their aircraft, that is the same world-wide. If there is any action taken that goes beyond the standard, then they should have to explain this to appropriate governing bodies. Every single time. And perhaps the local government should have to compensate the airline and passengers where no good cause is found for the delay.

Time and time again, I find myself talking to, and hearing of, people with good jobs that can no longer stand the hassle and delays caused by airport security. Some have already given up their jobs, others are trying to find a way to do so. My experiences are obviously the very small tip of the iceberg. Further, a large number of the internal passengers in the U.S. are on work related jorneys. The delays are not just hurting a vacation, but whole companies. This has not reversed, or even stopped increasing...it's getting worse, and they are our bread and butter.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

To have inconveninced so many passengers and cost the Airline such an unnecessary loss is reverse terrorsim.

The pilot could have been charged with the offense of being stupid and allowed to fly the trip.

After all where would he have gone?

Chuck E.

[robmac]

Guys,

I suggest we probably wrap this thread up for now, as it is beginning to come together as an info guide to the potential terrorist.

robmac

[mgerrard]

Apparently it wasn't just the bomb joke that cause a problem.

He apparently refused to take off his shoes and then tried to walk around the metal detector. When he was stopped from doing that then he made the bomb joke.

I do agree with the comments about TSA staff though, but the bigger problem is the idiots at higher levels(GW Bush and John Ashcroft to name but two). They are just trying to cover their rear ends with the public after 9/11 and they are the ones who hand the orders down.

Unfortunately, it's like a game of Chinese whispers and the translation from English to Spanish doesn't help matters.

[ZQA297/30]

I suspect that bloodymindedness has more than a little to do with this incident (possibly by both parties).

Mere hours before this incident, at JFK, my F/O politely asked if they were going to put some carpet in the screening area since everyone was padding around on the cold floor in their socks, and he received a very hostile reply to the effect that higher ups are in charge of that, move on and shut up.
The poor purser, who was right behind him, was selected for random check.

I refuse to be convinced that any would-be terrorist would announce to security that there was a bomb in his shoe and thereby attract extra attention, so that no matter what bad taste- it would have been obvious that this was an attempt at an ironic joke.
I suspect that the Freedom Fries Factor crept in there too.
No doubt it could have been handled in a less heavy handed way.
Hope it doesn't deteriorate into a childish tit for tat game.

[John Barnes]

The biggest threat to security is the security staff itself. With about three braincells in total that have to be shared with immigration as well you understand why we have to take off our shoes!! But what do you expect when your avarage pay for a security staff member at an international airport barely matches the minimum wage level ( In China!!)

[CaptainJurassic]

:p As Jim Croce once said:

You don't tug on Superman's cape
You dont' spit into the wind,
You don't pull the mask of the old Lone Ranger

And you certainly don't mess around with the mental midgets and mini Hitlers in the TSA.

Actually, that last bit wasn't really in the song, but you get my drift. As one very familiar with Government mentality, I issue a plea to all aviators to NEVER EVER try to dazzle these people with your flashing wit. It will all end in tears every time.

Be careful out there..

[Devils Advocate]

Uhm, seeing how we've got one on the flight deck already ( making sure to procure the exact same type as that one, so that it's a like-for-like situation ), next time you head off for work why not pop a fire axe in your flight bag ?

I can see it now.......

Security nerd - "What the hell is this ?!"

Pilot - "It's my personal fire axe. It's precisely the same as the one we already have on the flightdeck."

Security nerd - "But you can't take this through security, it's not allowed."

Pilot - "But as I say, there's already one on the flight deck which is exactly the same as this - this is simply a backup to that one - in that it's always handy to have two of everything, e.g. should one break, etc ... a bit like why we have two or more engines."

Security nerd - "But it's not allowed !"

Pilot - "But there's already one there that's the exact same as this - so why can't I have my own personal one as well ?"

Security nerd - "You're taking the P out of us, aren't you ?!"

Pilot - "I'm saying nothing." ;)

etc...........

Oh yes, there's hours of esoteric fun to be had with this ( ok, probably not ).

[maninblack]

Three weeks ago my wife and two children flew to the US to visit their respective parents/grandparents.

On arrival in "The Country Formerly Known as Land of the Free." the two children were seperated from their mother by a "security goon" and had an explosives sniffer pointed at them.

When the six year old became hysterical at having a "gun" pointed at him and screamed for his mother the said goon ordered my wife to keep away from the children and then started shouting at her and the crying child.

I do hope this intellectual pygmy feels proud of himself for following the rules, to the letter, without the need to ever worry his tiny brain with the concept of "interpretation" "common sense" and that he displayed that customer first attitude that characterises much of the United States. My wife is disenchanted with the US these days because of oafs like this and she is a citizen.

[Tan]

Cargo Boy

An excellent realistic post...I love your idea of shutting down the system worldwide...An idea whose time has come.

[Tripower455]

An excellent realistic post...I love your idea of shutting down the system worldwide...An idea whose time has come.

It's ironic that this is precisely what it took for the feds to start screening passengers in the first place! I guess that we have to be careful what we wish for.

I bet that not ONE of the guys who originally staged the SOS for screening ever though that they would be treated as passengers on their own airplanes.

[Flash2001]

Coupla comments here:

Robmac

Do you really believe that anything that anything that is generally known to the pilot community is unknown to the terrorists?

Given the quality of security person that is described on these pages, do you want to give him any options at all?

[CarltonBrowne the FO]

All the points Tripower and others have made are valid; it is ridiculous to screen crews, while most other airport employees can go airside without being subject to it.
Make it fair to everybody. Screen everyone.

[Airways Ed]

Just to keep it a bit balanced, now for the other side of the [euro] coin from AFP in Paris:



A French union representing Air France pilots on Monday accused US authorities of "intimidation" after a co-pilot on a New York to Paris flight was arrested for making a comment about a bomb during a security search.

"Air France pilots suffer intimidation that is the consequence of France's foreign policy (on Iraq) and are outraged by the scandalous attitude of the US authorities, in particular the body tasked with security checks," Philippe Raffin, the secretary general of the Syndicat des Personnels de l'Aviation Civile (SPAC), told AFP.

"This intimidation consists of a strip-tease in front of all the passengers that is unworthy of a country like the United States. It's unacceptable because it does not resemble security measures but rather score-settling in relation to French foreign policy," he said.

The United States was enraged when France opposed waging war on Iraq in March, and has vowed to make its displeasure felt.

Raffin said that the arrest at New York's John F. Kennedy airport last Friday of Philippe Riviere, the 51-year-old co-pilot on the flight to Paris, was "a second serious incident" after another "last June when an Air France pilot and crew suffered intimidation from US immigration authorities when they arrived in New York."

Riviere was released on 5,000-dollar (4,500-euro) bail Sunday after being charged with falsely reporting an incident in the first and second degree -- charges that carry respective prison sentences of up to seven and four years.

US law enforcement officials say that he had become frustrated with a security screening and was alleged to have joked "I have a bomb in my shoe," leading to his arrest.

But the New York Times newspaper quoted a passenger who witnessed the scene and who told a television channel that "one of the co-pilots got testy at the security and didn't like getting searched so much, and said: 'Well, what do you think, I have a bomb on me?'"

[roswellnut]

They should send that Air France F/O to Guantanamo Bay. Who knows, may he'll learn to speak English there!

[S76Heavy]

I do hope the French will retalliate in kind.
If that is what it takes to prove to the US that their current actions are dumb, ineffective and an insult to the intelligence, so be it. We need proper and all out security, not just window dressing.
These clowns can make a security threat out of anybody, they can simply harass their "clients" until one snaps. And given the right (or wrong) circumstances, everybody will snap. So they score a big media victory and prove that the system works..:yuk:

Meanwhile, the real terrorists are planning entirely different ops and just come to the airports to have a laugh. Heck, they have already won by the damage the US government is causing to its own economy and civil rights.

:rolleyes:

[LatviaCalling]

International politics aside, I think the French pilots union comment is absolutely from the far side. If Donald Rumsfeld was the security officer examining the pilot -- well just maybe. But, what do we have here, folks?

Just a plain security person who doesn't know his @ss from a hole in the ground, and I really don't think that he/she picked on the pilot just because he was French. Maybe his haughty attitude had something to do with it, but this $14,000 a year peon wasn't called on by Collin Powell to add one more nail to the French coffin.

The pilot made a bad mistake. Let's leave it at that. There was no conspiracy.

[sweeper]

pilot who made the comment is ,at the very best, dim.
what was the time scale for "the flight eventualy left after a co pilot flew in from LFPG "
one would think that figures for night stop costs would have been mentioned.
capiche???:hmm:

[West Coast]

There is no political slant. The same type of treatment would be given to a US pilot if he had said the same thing about a bomb.

[ChrisVJ]

Great debate. However no matter which side you are on, pilot or security, this incident is only on the periphery of the debate we should be having.

There has been a sea change in public behaviour and attitude towards authority. One of the things that was dearest to my beliefs living in both UK and Canada and frequently travelling in the USA was that, compared to most other places we had an attitude of disdain, maybe even 'rebellion' to authority that made our countries truly the most free and tolerant in the world, indeed it has been frquently and exhaustively shouted that the very attitude itself was what made our countries great.

Sadly that is disappearing. Vide: the lines of dispirited passengers ( and apparently aircrew) waiting for security checks, their cowed lack of repartee, never a smile even towards those trusted with the job of guarding our lives.

And the security staff themselves, suddenly raised from the status of menial accessories to that of gods, they are handling it so badly, like spoilt brat sportstars, and who might not? They have niether the tradition nor the training to be the deities they now have become. Worse, all that and still no one likes them, our acknowledgement of their power is resentful and grudging, we are unwilling subjects so they lay about themselves spitefully, visitng their anger on those nearest, sudden power is so corrupting.

The terrorists won that last round on so many levels, but sadly, largely because we let them. Our reaction is their victory and perhaps the most pernicious was the loss of the attitude toward personal freedom that so differentiated our society from theirs, and which they hated so much.

[Tan]

ChrisVJ

A great post and one that I agree with. On another note I had a chat with my parents a while back and their opinion of this whole security fiasco was that it reminded them of the power that the Governments assumed during WW2.

The politicians are going to be very reluctant to give up this new power trip that they are on unless the masses demand it.

A good start woud be throwing the politicians out of office, they'll understand that..

[Hot Wings]

I think that there is a political angle to this incident. I have heard that Air France pilots, arriving at US airports, are routinely being subjected to extensive delays ie. 2 - 2 1/2 hours just to get through immigration.

Recently, at JFK, an Air France Captain complained that he was feeling unwell (having waited for over 2 hours to "enter" the US). Immigration officers displayed no interest in helping him. When he passed out and collapsed, US officials still refused to help - telling the crew that they should take him back to the aircraft and radio for the paramedics from there!

It is of no surprise to me that flight crew are showing signs of getting fed up with these officials. Bid to avoid the US if you can!

[Grandpa]

1- I know personnally the french 1st Officer who was harassed by US personnel in JFK.
He is not the kind of guy to come with a stupid joke in front of any official in any country.
I just suppose there is a gap between his way of speaking english and what the "official" understood.

2- I had the occasion to go through US airports before and after Sep-11 : it went from perfect laxism to a high degree of paranoïa.

3- Since the Iraq invasion, I have collected a number of stories which prove that US "officials" (immigration, custom, safety) are too often glad enough to use a special degree of accuracy when they come to check french crews.
You can call it "nationalim", "racism".............. I just use the word "stupidity".

4- "Officials", as I call them, are only the low level personnel, who have been hastily recruited to ensure that a minimum level of safety is established in US airports.
This is maybe the cause why selection and training were not so efficient, and if you consider the salary level, it's another reason why this personnel is not as good as it could be, working in difficult conditions, whith a high responsability on their shoulders.

5- When you add to that the "french bashing" campaign which has been launched in USA by the highest authorities and relayed by the majority of popular media, it is not a surprise that the personnel cited above follows the attitude of the big chiefs.

6-Another consideration: in USA, after Sep-11, a number of laws have been passed which free the police authorities from the usual controls from democratic bodies in our so-called "civilised" countries. That means "officials" are now free to act as did their brothers in KGB, STASI................

7-Don't forget also that the foreign policy motto in USA is now "Who is not with us is against us", and the fact that US authorities feel free to act everywhere in the world whithout any consideration for local sovereignity.

Conclusion: is it exagerated to wait for the next step "God is on our side" engraved on the belt buckkle of these so polite "officials"?
Poor America!

[[email protected]]

what do you think about having a metal fork and a "plastic" knife on the meal tray!!!

[LatviaCalling]

Grandpa,

I really think that you're a little bit over the edge in your post that American security personnel are looking for the French. The crisis after Iraq is over and the latest signs are that relations between the countries are on the up and up.

The sad fact is, however, that the security attendant probably didn't know that this individual was an Air France pilot. The even sadder fact is that this security attendant probably didn't even know where France was.

(Latest U.S. survey shows that high school seniors had heard of Paris, but 66% didn't know where to locate it. Twenty percent didn't know that Washington, D.C. was the capital of the U.S.)

So what do you expect in this case. Do you suppose this person was a super IQ genius who was really after the "frogs" because they'd done him wrong in Iraq? I don't think so. He was probably thinking about putting new see-through plastic slip covers on his sofa in his apartment in Queens when some idiot came up to him with a bomb in the shoe prank.

[Grandpa]

My dear latvia.
I'm affraid you didn't read my post.
So I have to repeat: french crews are not treated the same way as others in some US Airports (including JFK).
The security checks are longer, they have to wait when there is no other crew, and often when another crew is coming after them this crew is free long before them, not to speak about the attitude of the "officials".
If you speak french you could check what I say on Radiocockpit.com , there is a lot of topics about this discrimination.

[recceguy]

I firmly think that, in the interest of civilization, the US need another Vietnam from time to time (every 30 years ?)

They have recently been successful all around (Balkans, Irak mk1, Afghanistan...) so a little bit too much went through their brains.

As I'm not american, there is no reason that I should celebrate any victory from their side. One of the terrorists goals was surely to block the air transport system as it is now through all those security stories (especially in US) and they are probably laughing a lot now.

A little suggestion : when being harassed by those security monkeys, just articulate clearly some specific comments in your own language - they will not understand ( an american speaking a foreign laguage ? he would already be a high-level industry executive) and at least the rest of your crew will have something to smile about.

[LatviaCalling]

recceguy,

I don't see that the Vietnam War has anything to do with today's aviation security measures at airports and I was wrong to insinuate that harassment takes place only at American airports.

At Heathrow I saw a British security official order an Indian seikh to remove his wound up turban which I imagine was very demeaning for him, I guess because of cast and religion. He protested, but finally did it. Nothing was found, but at least 100 people oogled him. It was like what do they wear under a Scottish kilt.

Going back to Vietnam, wasn't it the French who lost the great battle of Dien Bien Phu and then pulled all their troops out of the country. I believe it was in the mid-1950s.

So, Vietnam, my friend, has nothing to do with airport security, no matter how much we dislike the security personnel. Most of them don't even remember Vietnam.

[Airbubba]

>>At Heathrow I saw a British security official order an Indian seikh to remove his wound up turban which I imagine was very demeaning for him, I guess because of cast and religion. He protested, but finally did it. Nothing was found, but at least 100 people oogled him. It was like what do they wear under a Scottish kilt.<<

Well, by tradition Sikhs carry daggers but at LHR they have received a politically correct special exemption that does not apply to members of other religions.

See:

http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=59697

[packsonflite]

This is obviously a very emotive subject but I would like to make one observation.

Nearly all of the criticism has been directed at US security screening, yet for many years US pilots have had to subject themselves to security screening throughout Europe and don't appear to have found that too onerous. Whilst it is true that there have been notable lapses, such as Richard Reid and his explosive shoes getting past security in Paris, in general, aviation security is still pretty good.

The problem would seem to be that post 9/11, the US in typical fashion, decided re-invent the the wheel and the result is the rather OTT and ham-fisted approach that is currently empoyed. If true, I find it quite unbelieveable that ground staff are not subjected to the same level of security screeing as everyone else requiring airside access.

There's been a lot of sniping at the intelligence of TSA security screeners, but in my personal experience they are far superior to those employed by the private companies that provided security checking prior to the TSA. Give these people a break, they're doing an unpopular but very necessary job.

[trustno1]

From Today's Irish Independent.

http://www.unison.ie/irish_independent/



GAA star 'bomb joke' case closed


LEITRIM footballer Ciaran Murray, who joked about having a bomb in his bag at JFK International Airport, has had charges against him dismissed in New York.

The case arose when Murray, returning after beating New York in the Connacht championship, joked with security in JFK that he had a bomb in his bag.

"Search it good, now, because I have a bomb in there. It's only a small bomb, though," he said, according to court records.

The 27-year-old sales representative from Ballinamore, Co Leitrim, was promptly arrested for making a false report.

Facing that charge, which carried a seven-year jail term, Mr Murray pleaded guilty and was released on a $2,500 bond.

He was later ordered to complete 70 hours of community service and pay a $250 fine.

At the court yesterday, Mr Murray was cleared of all charges when he produced proof that he had completed his community service in New York.

It is not known what type of community service he had to carry out.

Mr Murray, who was not required to appear at court yesterday, was in Ireland when he heard the news that he was cleared.

According to his lawyer, Eugene Crowe, he is relieved to have the ordeal behind him.

Georgina Brennan
in New York

[satumare]

A guy who talks French and another in American "english" and American obsession in terrorism,boy, what a circus

[WhatsaLizad?]

#1. I believe you. Personally, I am betting on the FO's side of the story.

#2. Somewhat agree. A little paranoia is needed. Last time I looked, a few muderous bastards have stated they will keep trying to attack US aircraft. They also have millions more that tacitly approve of their methods of solving grievences.

#3. It's not just the French. I am a born in the US, caucaisan pilot on international routes and I can tell you they treat evryone like chit.

#4. The salary level isn't that bad for the brains required.

#5. The "French bashing" in the states has been fleeting and never has equaled the pompous, arrogant sustained level of bashing the French have inflicted on all things related to the USA for decades.

#6. KGB and the Stasi may be a little strong comparisons. It still bears watching to prevent abuses and concentrations of power.

#7. Not quite. It makes a nice slogan for the whining masses though

[Tree]

I don't agree with the "french bashing" conspiracy theory. It dies in the face of the fact that there have been similar previous incidents with pilots who are American citizens. I spend a lot of time in the USA and they are just not that type of vindictive people. I do think that arrogance played a role here but the French do not have a monopoly on that.
Security screening is a fact of life now girls and boys, just deal with it, it only takes a few minutes.

TO: recceguy

"they will not understand ( an american speaking a foreign laguage ?"

I know many Americans who speak a foreign language and they do it very well.

[powerset]

I'm heartily sick of the c$$p we have to take off of the ignorant brain dead as$es at US airports and no way do they have to take the same sort of grief here. We had a stewerdess on our last flight sent home because she had a new passport and forgot to bring the old one with her aircrew visa in it with her. An easy mistake to make, if she had turned up as a passenger without a visa she could have filled out the forms at the airport but despite having her pass and being on the aircraft manifest and having 3 flightcrew and 14 cabin crew there to vouch for and having a valid passport they sent her home to prove a point. Well they proved one. That they are idiots and I for one wouldn't spend a penny of my own money going to the states right now with their attitude and I speak as one who has lived and enjoyed being there and has many US friends.

[wallabie]

I m just returning from a long needed vacation and feel I should just through my stuff into the washing machine and leave again !!

One thing I would never do, unless I had a death wish, is test the american sense of humour and that's under normal circumstances. In a case like this this was just plain stupid and the guy did say he had a bomb in his shoe regardless of the pathetic excuses he came up with once the heat was turned on him. Didn't look to pridefull then !
This put the compagny in a very bad spot and for the life of me i will never support a twitt like that. They are the very same who come up with stuff like " We are the crème de la crème of all working creatures "
You don't like the security screening, however biased and stupid it sometimes is..........................;well stay the hell at home.

[Basil]

I was not aware that brief removal of his turban would be any more demeaning than, say, cap or shoe removal; maybe a little more irritating to replace.
Perhaps a Sikh PPRuNer would care to comment?

p.s.
<<It was like what do they wear under a Scottish kilt.>>
Back in '59 I recollect an English NAAFI girl asking that question of one of our A&SH soldiers - he lost no time in showing her :ooh:

[LatviaCalling]

Basil,

My wife who lived in India for two years told me that the Sikh class never removed their turbans in public, because of all of that braided or twined hair underneath. It was because of her adivce that I mentioned that the removal of a turban at airport security was demeaning. I would like to know from turban-wearers if this is true.

[Basil]

Yes, it's entirely outside my experience and I have to admit that I don't know.
I'd be surprised if one could carry a knife onto a US aircraft for religious reasons. Could, for instance, an Arab carry his knife because it's part of his culture?