They believe their own propaganda!

[Erin Brockovich]

Well 180,000 deaths over 18,000 years isn’t that bad……….but on a serious note, no-one here has stated or implied that they don’t care about terrorism. Yes it is a fact of life now and probably here to stay for a while. What makes it worse though is knee jerk reactions and poorly thought out anti-terror measures.

Now hangar 9 and AoA, have a good re-read of the previous posts and try to see where everyone is coming from. I’ll say it again. Why screen the pilots who have been already screened and have a vested interest in the safety of the aircraft but not other workers with access who stay on the ground. Smoke and mirrors, not a real solution.

[Kaptin M]

And in the absense of the pilot who gives clearance to go ahead and board?

Where is a plane without a pilot going?

Oh, so you're a Loadmaster then, h 9.
The only stuff boarded without the pic's permission is freight, and aircraft (ship's) stores.
Bums in seats will have to wait until the Tech crew gives the nod that THEY are ready.

Did I state that I disagreed with ALL of what you said, h 9?
You can read whatever you like into my post.

[Pete Conrad]

And yet it is OK for the security guards and APS to enter airside and walk around on the tarmac without going through screening? I have seen it myself in Sydney!!

[18-Wheeler]

And yet it is OK for the security guards and APS to enter airside and walk around on the tarmac without going through screening? I have seen it myself in Sydney!!

My point exactly.
I have gone through the screening and I know the security baboons haven't.
Since I now know they have not been checked, why should I not have them removed or arrested if they enter my plane? They couild be carrying anything.
They are obviously a security risk.

As a pilot I have an inherent interest in the security of my aeroplane, they do not.

[Pete Conrad]

18-wheeler, it's that point alone that should be brought to the attention of departmental secrateries and heads of Government, as to why can their staff bypass security screening when they can be found at times to be just as corrupt as anyone else.

Attorney Generals department, DOTARS, Federal Police, all members of all departments should go through the same screening daily as everybody else.

You want to get serious about security, screen EVERYBODY!!

[hangar 9]

So next time you are still getting your hot chocolate on the way from your briefing, while everyone awaits your presence, and the CSM asks me if it is ok to board the PAX. I should answer, "who gives a sh!t". or perhaps next time you arrive at the a/c and the pax's are already boarding , you should announce" everyone please clear the a/c while I make my entrance.

Qantas SOP requires I give clearance to board in your absence, but then I don't know what they do in the regionals.

[Ron & Edna Johns]

Well, Hangar 9, who ever you are, you are clearly not a pilot or a CSM by what you have said. So, I suggest you go and have another read of the Qantas books before you exceed your authority again:

from the Flight Admin Manual:

18.4 Passenger Boarding.

The CSM (or deputy) shall not accept passengers for boading until it has been confirmed with the Pilot-In-Command (or deputy) that embarkation of passengers may proceed.

If, at the proposed boarding time, the Pilot-In-Command (or deputy) is unavailable and in the absence of any contrary information the CSM (or deputy) may approve boarding.

For domestic operations, in order to maintain the abilty to establish immediate communication with Cabin Crew should any need arise, passenger boarding shall not commence until at least one Flight Crew member is present. That Flight Crew member must be aware that boarding is taking place and may be either on the flight deck or conducting the walk-around.

(.....plus a bit of extra, not-relevant stuff....)

If you are not a Captain, F/O, S/O, CSM or CSS, you don't have that authority. Period. The CSM (deputy) may consult with you as to whether the passengers are ready to board, but they aren't getting your approval. At the end of the day, when considering duty-of-care issues, liability, etc, it is a very important distinction.

You bring this on yourself with childish comments about '"getting hot chocolate on the way from briefing". If we're late to the plane it's for a good reason, certainly not because we've stopped at the shop. Goodness me.......

Now......... back to the bloody topic!

[Pete Conrad]

Hangar9, this topic is about legitimate safety concerns that us professional pilots have in regard to who boards our aircraft and who walk around airside unchecked. I think it is a fair and valid point that everybody should go through screening, regardless of where you work and in what capacity.

Security is not about having one set of rules for one and another set of rules for someone else.

The reason why pilots get so p!ssed off is because there is no consistency with who gets screened.

I find it appaling that a Group 4 security person can walk airside without going through screening, and I have seen this myself at Sydney, whereas, us pilots get the full bottle.

As a tech crew member, I get very concerned when I see non-aviation types getting access airside without screening, thats my point.

[Erin Brockovich]

Baggage handler 'wrote guide to killing infidels'
By David King
10jun05

THE jihad guide says assassins should have a terrorist psychology, quick wits and a strong ideology in order to kill infidels.
The guide details the best way for "brothers and small cells" to fight to support Islam and spells out the rewards of martyrdom.

Former Qantas baggage handler Bilal Khazal is alleged to have compiled the document, entitled Provisions on the rules of Jihad, as a manual for militants to wage holy war.

He faced a Sydney court yesterday charged with collecting and making documents connected with terrorism.

Need we say more!

[pullock]

Hangar9,

I simply can't believe that you are saying what you are saying. Your blind faith in the idea that what the government does is best for you makes you the ideal robot.

It is older people and those who are able to think critically and for themselves who question stupid laws like these.

Everyone who works at or flys from an airport knows that the security is simple to bypass, and is only achievement is visible security to the masses.

Nobody here has mentioned any operational "secret" that any observant bad dude wouldn't notice himself. If you think they wouldn't then it is you who has the ego - not the posters here.

The rules are crap. The people who enforce them tend to be over-zealous with a little power and low pay.

Don't you get the irony of having a securitar guard exerting his will over you when he has half your IQ, and his only job qualification is a TAFE security certificate and the fact that he applied for the job!!!!

As I have said in the past - now everybody is an authoratative figure - airport securitar guards may have been unemployed two months ago and are now securitar nazis. This is not the Australia I remember, nor the one that I want to live in.

blah.

[boofhead]

You are not alone, Pullock..

How many real terrorists have been caught trying to board airplanes by airport security? None.
If they did catch one or two, assuming they were armed or had explosives, what would they do then? With the press of panicking passengers in the Disneyland queue, how could they stop these terrorists from blowing themselves up or shooting the civilians around them, which seems to be what a terrorist is all about? There can be no effective armed response, they tried that and the guards got so bored they had to pull them out. Only in countries like Korea do you see well-armed teams patrolling the airports. When I see that in LAX or Sydney I will agree that progress is being made.
It is worse than a joke; it wastes resources that could otherwise be used to do a real job at detecting the threats and protecting the traveling public, and by inferring that if we give up our rights and freedoms we will be safe is fraud and a huge lie. It is all about power, as is most politics. The government(s) must think that 9/11 was a gift from God, it gives them so much more power, influence and money, and at no risk to them. When they fail to stop the terrorists, who learn quickly how to bypass "security", they can claim they need even more of our freedoms and money. If there are no attacks, they can claim to be preventing them. Win-win for those we continue to elect into positions of power. We are the fools.

[Ultralights]

i would be willing to bet that the delivery area get no change to security arrangment, after all this security BS, i will still be able to get into the "clean" area of the terminal with any size parcel i can carry! unchecked, and unchallenged! just as i have alwys been!

[Chimbu chuckles]

What seems to have been (conveniantly) 'forgotten' in the intervening period since 9/11 is that no failure of airport security occurred on that day. The only latent failure was that of the intellegence community...again!

For the most part money spent on airport security in Australia since then has been wasted...any self respecting terrorist could have and still could get whatever they need airside and onto the aircraft and then the terrorists board through 'security'.

But if/when they do they can't access the cockpit because we are all locked safe in the cockpit and fully aquainted with the repercussions of opening said armoured door.

So what usefull purpose has the increased agravation to the travelling public/aircrews served? About the only one I can see is the terrorists are incapacitated with laughter at the collective stupidity of our elected officials and the empire building morons they have placed in charge of 'protecting' us.

[Ultralights]

as i have said from day 1, every new law, restriction, security check, is another win for terrorism! every thing done since Sep 11, will not prevent another one!

[V1OOPS]

Chimbu

So what usefull purpose has the increased agravation to the travelling public/aircrews served? About the only one I can see is the terrorists are incapacitated with laughter at the collective stupidity of our elected officials and the empire building morons they have placed in charge of 'protecting' us.

And how many more millions (billions?) will be spent before the paranoia wears off - even in Oz?

It used to be Reds under the bed that kept them awake - now it's Osamas in pyjamas.

The loonies are now running the mad house.

[sigh]

[Capt Claret]

To add to the Reds under the Bed and to prove that the whole shebang is run by loonies ....

Last trip ex the Centrally located regional airport the F/O was nabbed by the ever vigilant security guards. His misdemeanour? He had the temerity to try and smuggle two Allen keys, through in his nav bag.

That said Allen Keys had lived in the bag for some 6 or more years, forgotten for the last 5, and had been undetected through countless xray checks at countless aerodromes was irrelevant.

These highly dangerous (and blunt) Allen Keys were not permitted into the sterile area of the airport and had to be surrendered.

[Eastwest Loco]

Then there is security at LAX.

The reason they do security scans with photos and fingerprints is because Manuel and Jesus and their mates (like the rest of the scabby service industry in that schizeenholen) probably can't read English and have an IQ hovering around room temperature during winter with the heat pump off.

You could probably get a rocket propelled grenade through security there as generally the cheapest contractor is the same mob that cleans the terminal, and a Mattel sticker would most likely fool them.

Try getting on with a pair of nail scissors though.

EWL

[pullock]

I'm afraid I just won't be transiting the USA again.

Aparently they now require finger print scans of Australians whilst not requiring the same of UK citizens. Apart from the obvious outrageous inequality there, as Australians (not necisarily by choice) we stood beside the US in their war against Iraq, as did the UK- yet we are required to be treated as criminals until proven innocent - we do not expect the same of US citizens entering Australia.

So now we see our own government favoring US citizens above it's own.

I hope that our government reads this so it can have some idea of how miss guided it has become.

[Capt Claret]

pullock

In a similar vein, Phillip Ruddock waived jurisdiction in a case where two US marines were charged with attempted murder after they allegedly attacked and glassed a Townsville man, under the guise that "the US marines would face harsher sentences in a US military court than in the Australian courts."

See here for the full story of how this Australian was treated with less rights by his own government than foreign soldiers were afforded.

Bill Leak's cartoon in The Australian, last year, says it all.





(thanks john for hosting)

[Lower the Nose!]

{ Apparently they now require finger print scans of Australians whilst not requiring the same of UK citizens }

Not so, I'm afraid. It's the same for us too.