Mirror exposes deadly helicopter peril! (Merged)
Carbonfibre-based lifeform
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: London
Posts: 747
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mirror exposes deadly helicopter peril!
Here we go again - The Daily Mirror (a tabloid 'newspaper' for those not in the UK) has a large splash today on the terrible peril represented by the fact that helicopters are allowed to fly over London.
The opening paragragh give the flavour:
Click here to savour this journalistic treat for yourselves 
The opening paragragh give the flavour:
A TERRIFYING security loophole was exposed by a Daily Mirror sight-seeing flight over London yesterday.
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: by the seaside
Posts: 216
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Outstanding piece of journalism...... to think it even warrants the front page, there can't be more newsworthy items today.
Maybe we should ban tourism flights worldwide for The Mirror newspaper. Or maybe I've beaten them to tomorrows headlines.
Idiots!!!
Maybe we should ban tourism flights worldwide for The Mirror newspaper. Or maybe I've beaten them to tomorrows headlines.
Idiots!!!
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Age: 71
Posts: 1,364
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't disagree with any of the previous posts. However, I wouldn't dismiss such pieces of nonsense lightly; because they are nonsense does not mean they won't be listened to. There are a number of completely useless, pointless and ineffective restrictions on GA flying in the name of security that already exist - e.g. restricted areas around prisons and nuclear sites that provide no real protection.
It would only take some half-baked politician in a corner who wants a favourable press response to latch onto this and such flights could be history.
Perhaps a sensible question to ask, is what do we, the UK helicopter industry, do about this? The easiest thing may be to do nothing and keep your head down. However, if some politician takes up the "cause", who knows where it might lead.
It would only take some half-baked politician in a corner who wants a favourable press response to latch onto this and such flights could be history.
Perhaps a sensible question to ask, is what do we, the UK helicopter industry, do about this? The easiest thing may be to do nothing and keep your head down. However, if some politician takes up the "cause", who knows where it might lead.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: South East England
Posts: 93
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WE COULD HAVE BOMBED ANY TARGET IN LONDON
Feb 28 2003
EXCLUSIVE
By Gary Jones
A TERRIFYING security loophole was exposed by a Daily Mirror sight-seeing flight over London yesterday.
We hired a helicopter without identity or luggage checks and flew over many of the capital's landmarks - including the Houses of Parliament, Canary Wharf and the City of London.
Had we been terrorists, it would have been easy to overpower the pilot and send the helicopter crashing onto the House of Commons or Big Ben.
We could have hurled a bomb or unleashed a deadly poison cloud.
Buckingham Palace was within close range. And at one point, the helicopter hovered over Parliament at 1,500ft.
We passed the Commons three times, causing so much noise that guests at a special lunch attended by Lord Tebbit could hardly hear themselves speak.
Intelligence sources have warned that al-Qaeda terrorists might attempt a propaganda suicide bombing of Westminster.
Helicopter sight-seeing tours were banned briefly after the September 11 attacks in America.
In the US, tough security measures were introduced following the air hijackings - including stringent identity and bag checks for helicopter flights.
But there were no questions asked when photographer Emma Cattell and myself arrived at Biggin Hill in Kent for yesterday's trip. We didn't even give our full names.
I had phoned Biggin Hill Helicopters at about 10.30am saying I wanted to hire a helicopter for a sight-seeing tour as a birthday present for my girlfriend.
At first I was told one wasn't available because of a training lesson but I was called back shortly afterwards on a mobile phone to be told: "If you can get here by 1.15pm you'll be OK."
After parking directly outside BHH's prefabricated building, I was met by a man called Will, who said: "You must be Gary."
After a short briefing about the flight, involving how to wear seatbelts correctly and avoid the rotor blades, the four-seater helicopter landed to pick us up.
I had a black bag with strap slung over my shoulder and my colleague a large handbag containing a digital camera. At no stage were the bags checked for their contents. They were not even given a cursory glance.
The only mention made of my bag - which could easily have concealed a gun or a gas canister - was when I laid it at my feet.
I was asked by the pilot called Simon, in his late 20s, what it contained. I replied: "A camera." I was told to put the bag in the back because it could become entangled in the pedals.
No check had been made on either of our identities before we boarded the flight. Apart from the credit card details which I had given over the phone earlier, BHH had no information about us.
It was only after we had landed and were driving back to London that an address was asked for so a receipt could be given for the cost of the flight.
The helicopter emblazoned with the sign LBC - the capital's independent radio station which hires the chopper for its travel reports - flew directly towards Canary Wharf before following the path of the River Thames.
The spectacular journey passed the City of London and was supposed to end at Battersea power station.
But our trip was interrupted by a Ministry of Defence Chinook helicopter taking special services personnel to the Duke of York's barracks at Chelsea.
The distinctive dark green MoD chopper was given priority and flew beneath us a couple of kilometres away as we hovered above the Commons.
Helicopter sight-seeing trips follow a pre-determined path into the capital, twisting and turning along the Thames.
But with the Houses of Parliament directly on the river, a terrorist would not need to manoeuvre the helicopter any great distance to hit the target. Security services and anti- terrorist police have warned of the threat of attack.
Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir John Stevens says: "It is not a question of if, but when."
==============================================
Perhaps the UK Government ought to search every vehicle entering the conjestion charging zone
Whatever next ?
Feb 28 2003
EXCLUSIVE
By Gary Jones
A TERRIFYING security loophole was exposed by a Daily Mirror sight-seeing flight over London yesterday.
We hired a helicopter without identity or luggage checks and flew over many of the capital's landmarks - including the Houses of Parliament, Canary Wharf and the City of London.
Had we been terrorists, it would have been easy to overpower the pilot and send the helicopter crashing onto the House of Commons or Big Ben.
We could have hurled a bomb or unleashed a deadly poison cloud.
Buckingham Palace was within close range. And at one point, the helicopter hovered over Parliament at 1,500ft.
We passed the Commons three times, causing so much noise that guests at a special lunch attended by Lord Tebbit could hardly hear themselves speak.
Intelligence sources have warned that al-Qaeda terrorists might attempt a propaganda suicide bombing of Westminster.
Helicopter sight-seeing tours were banned briefly after the September 11 attacks in America.
In the US, tough security measures were introduced following the air hijackings - including stringent identity and bag checks for helicopter flights.
But there were no questions asked when photographer Emma Cattell and myself arrived at Biggin Hill in Kent for yesterday's trip. We didn't even give our full names.
I had phoned Biggin Hill Helicopters at about 10.30am saying I wanted to hire a helicopter for a sight-seeing tour as a birthday present for my girlfriend.
At first I was told one wasn't available because of a training lesson but I was called back shortly afterwards on a mobile phone to be told: "If you can get here by 1.15pm you'll be OK."
After parking directly outside BHH's prefabricated building, I was met by a man called Will, who said: "You must be Gary."
After a short briefing about the flight, involving how to wear seatbelts correctly and avoid the rotor blades, the four-seater helicopter landed to pick us up.
I had a black bag with strap slung over my shoulder and my colleague a large handbag containing a digital camera. At no stage were the bags checked for their contents. They were not even given a cursory glance.
The only mention made of my bag - which could easily have concealed a gun or a gas canister - was when I laid it at my feet.
I was asked by the pilot called Simon, in his late 20s, what it contained. I replied: "A camera." I was told to put the bag in the back because it could become entangled in the pedals.
No check had been made on either of our identities before we boarded the flight. Apart from the credit card details which I had given over the phone earlier, BHH had no information about us.
It was only after we had landed and were driving back to London that an address was asked for so a receipt could be given for the cost of the flight.
The helicopter emblazoned with the sign LBC - the capital's independent radio station which hires the chopper for its travel reports - flew directly towards Canary Wharf before following the path of the River Thames.
The spectacular journey passed the City of London and was supposed to end at Battersea power station.
But our trip was interrupted by a Ministry of Defence Chinook helicopter taking special services personnel to the Duke of York's barracks at Chelsea.
The distinctive dark green MoD chopper was given priority and flew beneath us a couple of kilometres away as we hovered above the Commons.
Helicopter sight-seeing trips follow a pre-determined path into the capital, twisting and turning along the Thames.
But with the Houses of Parliament directly on the river, a terrorist would not need to manoeuvre the helicopter any great distance to hit the target. Security services and anti- terrorist police have warned of the threat of attack.
Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir John Stevens says: "It is not a question of if, but when."
==============================================
Perhaps the UK Government ought to search every vehicle entering the conjestion charging zone
Whatever next ?
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Age: 71
Posts: 1,364
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Heliport,
My initial reaction (accompanied by a surge of anger) was to do things like writing to the Editor, and "remonstrate" with him, providing a logical and measured explanation of why his article is wrong.
However, a brief moment of rational thought suggests to me that this would be exactly the sort of reaction that they would want, so that they could prolong the story and its "news" value. Upon reflection, I guess (hope) that it will be a 5-second wonder and will die a death, buried under the next "sexual celebrity revelation" over the weekend.
Just in case, though I thought it might be sensible to mention it to the BHAB. I left a message, as had the poor old operator who had got caught by this "exclusive".
I think the most effective action at the moment is to ignore it, and treat it with the contempt it deserves.
My initial reaction (accompanied by a surge of anger) was to do things like writing to the Editor, and "remonstrate" with him, providing a logical and measured explanation of why his article is wrong.
However, a brief moment of rational thought suggests to me that this would be exactly the sort of reaction that they would want, so that they could prolong the story and its "news" value. Upon reflection, I guess (hope) that it will be a 5-second wonder and will die a death, buried under the next "sexual celebrity revelation" over the weekend.
Just in case, though I thought it might be sensible to mention it to the BHAB. I left a message, as had the poor old operator who had got caught by this "exclusive".
I think the most effective action at the moment is to ignore it, and treat it with the contempt it deserves.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: South East England
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Surely for the terrorist on a budget it would be cheaper to charter a small boat on the Thames to attack Parliament. Or even better value, just hire a cab "over-power" the driver and drive up to the House of Commons! At least that way any attack won't be foiled due to bad weather.
Maybe if the Daily Mirror ran the capital they would check everyone's bags in the City, just to be on the safe side.
Don't journalists have anything better to do these days??
Maybe if the Daily Mirror ran the capital they would check everyone's bags in the City, just to be on the safe side.
Don't journalists have anything better to do these days??
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: LEAX, Spain
Age: 62
Posts: 261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Put your pens down
Helinut is right!
The Mirror's so-called exclusive is a fine example of what real journalists call a non-story. By complaining you merely feed the non-story and turn it into a real story. The next day's headline then becomes "Heli operators object to safety calls" or somesuch, and before you know it you're embroiled in a debate where you have to defend your position of resisting a move that might prevent another 9/11.
See how it works?
My advice: don't feed it
Dantruck
The Mirror's so-called exclusive is a fine example of what real journalists call a non-story. By complaining you merely feed the non-story and turn it into a real story. The next day's headline then becomes "Heli operators object to safety calls" or somesuch, and before you know it you're embroiled in a debate where you have to defend your position of resisting a move that might prevent another 9/11.
See how it works?
My advice: don't feed it
Dantruck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Harwich
Age: 65
Posts: 777
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No snap reactions
I've mentioned it to the BHAB too, for possible discussion at an upcoming (previously-scheduled) meeting.
I did indeed nearly explode at the breakfast table, but calming down and reflecting is a wiser course. Let's see what kind of 'calls for clamping down on irresponsible etc etc' emerge.
Steve Warner.
I did indeed nearly explode at the breakfast table, but calming down and reflecting is a wiser course. Let's see what kind of 'calls for clamping down on irresponsible etc etc' emerge.
Steve Warner.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Age: 71
Posts: 1,364
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The printed version of the "exclusive" is worse than the net version. It covers the whole of the front page (except for a photo of J-Lo's butt) and pages 4 & 5. It includes all sorts of sub-articles of quotes from spokepersons from D of T and the Lib-Dems etc., as well as the lead editorial opinion.
Interestingly, I have not seen or heard any other media outlet take up the same story.
P.S. I didn't buy a copy, but borrowed it.
Interestingly, I have not seen or heard any other media outlet take up the same story.
P.S. I didn't buy a copy, but borrowed it.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: London
Posts: 2,916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm inclined to agree this absurd non-story doesn't merit a response.
However, Biggin Hill Helicopters doesn't have that luxury. A 'No Comment' could easily be deliberately distorted to give the impresssion that they had done something wrong and/or had something to hide.
This is the full text of BHH's response to the Mirror. It will be interesting to see how much of it is published.
I suggest any other operators who wish to take advantage of free publicity for their pleasure flights should offer their services to another newspaper. BHH seems to have a monopoly with the Mirror at the monent!
Tudor Owen
[Posted with the permission of my clients.]
However, Biggin Hill Helicopters doesn't have that luxury. A 'No Comment' could easily be deliberately distorted to give the impresssion that they had done something wrong and/or had something to hide.
This is the full text of BHH's response to the Mirror. It will be interesting to see how much of it is published.
“Terrorflying’ Story
Response by Captain Bill Lowry.
Managing Director and Chief Pilot
BIGGIN HILL HELICOPTERS
“Biggin Hill Helicopters has conducted sight-seeing tours over London for 10 years and I’m very proud of the unblemished safety record which we’ve established.
We comply with all regulations laid down by the Civil Aviation Authority and, in common with all other Air Operators, we’re constantly monitored by the Authority. The Authority has never once had cause to criticise, or suggest changes to, our procedures.
“Helicopter operators are not required to search passengers or their bags, and I’m not aware of any operator in the country that does so. I think it’s very unfair that the article gives the impression that our procedures are in some way lax.
“If the Mirror would like to see the rules changed, it would have been much fairer if you’d taken the matter up with the authorities. We don’t search passengers or bags and, if you’d asked us, we would have told you.
There was no need to use such under-handed methods as if you were exposing some shameful behaviour. We have nothing to hide.
“It’s a great pity you resorted to sensationalising an otherwise accurate story with exaggeration and a number of inaccuracies.”
Captain Simon Maynard, pilot of the helicopter, said: “It is simply not true that I hovered over the Houses of Parliament, yet your front page headline claims that I did for five minutes. That is simply not true and is blatant scare-mongering.
All helicopters over London are under strict Air Traffic Control at all times. The Heathrow radar trace will confirm that what your reporters claim is not true. You’re welcome to obtain a print-out from the National Air Traffic Service. By the way, I’m mid 20s, not late 20s.”
Captain Maynard has been a professional pilot for five years. He holds an Airline Transport Pilots Licence, the highest level of professional pilots licence.
“You suggest a terrorist could manoeuvre a helicopter to hit the Houses of Parliament. Let’s keep this in perspective - we’re talking about a small helicopter the size of a mini here, yet lorries and trucks drive past the Houses of Parliament and Buckingham Palace every day. They could be packed with tons of explosives. Are you suggesting all lorries and trucks should be prohibited from driving through Central London?
Where do you draw the line? If we change our way of life to try to cope with every conceivable means a terrorist might use, the terrorists have won anyway.”
Response by Captain Bill Lowry.
Managing Director and Chief Pilot
BIGGIN HILL HELICOPTERS
“Biggin Hill Helicopters has conducted sight-seeing tours over London for 10 years and I’m very proud of the unblemished safety record which we’ve established.
We comply with all regulations laid down by the Civil Aviation Authority and, in common with all other Air Operators, we’re constantly monitored by the Authority. The Authority has never once had cause to criticise, or suggest changes to, our procedures.
“Helicopter operators are not required to search passengers or their bags, and I’m not aware of any operator in the country that does so. I think it’s very unfair that the article gives the impression that our procedures are in some way lax.
“If the Mirror would like to see the rules changed, it would have been much fairer if you’d taken the matter up with the authorities. We don’t search passengers or bags and, if you’d asked us, we would have told you.
There was no need to use such under-handed methods as if you were exposing some shameful behaviour. We have nothing to hide.
“It’s a great pity you resorted to sensationalising an otherwise accurate story with exaggeration and a number of inaccuracies.”
Captain Simon Maynard, pilot of the helicopter, said: “It is simply not true that I hovered over the Houses of Parliament, yet your front page headline claims that I did for five minutes. That is simply not true and is blatant scare-mongering.
All helicopters over London are under strict Air Traffic Control at all times. The Heathrow radar trace will confirm that what your reporters claim is not true. You’re welcome to obtain a print-out from the National Air Traffic Service. By the way, I’m mid 20s, not late 20s.”
Captain Maynard has been a professional pilot for five years. He holds an Airline Transport Pilots Licence, the highest level of professional pilots licence.
“You suggest a terrorist could manoeuvre a helicopter to hit the Houses of Parliament. Let’s keep this in perspective - we’re talking about a small helicopter the size of a mini here, yet lorries and trucks drive past the Houses of Parliament and Buckingham Palace every day. They could be packed with tons of explosives. Are you suggesting all lorries and trucks should be prohibited from driving through Central London?
Where do you draw the line? If we change our way of life to try to cope with every conceivable means a terrorist might use, the terrorists have won anyway.”
Tudor Owen
[Posted with the permission of my clients.]
Last edited by Flying Lawyer; 2nd Mar 2003 at 15:55.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Posts: 452
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Perhaps the best way of stopping Britain from becoming a 'fortress under siege' is for Blair to stop provoking retaliation from those who have never previously been a threat.
Nationalism is good for wars and Olympics. When's the next Olympics?
Nationalism is good for wars and Olympics. When's the next Olympics?
Join Date: May 2001
Location: London
Posts: 528
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Mirror's editor, Piers Morgan, is still, after two years, under investigation for dubious share dealings in a company called Viglen. He bought these shares the day before they were tipped in a "finance" column in the Mirror called City Slickers, and made a handsome profit when they rose as a result of publication. Some of his shameless gyrations when questioned about this patent fraud upon his readers would have been comical to behold had not the situation been so serious. The two chancers who wrote the column were both sacked after they said Morgan had lied repeatedly over the chain of events leading up to the share purchase. I cannot see his moon face on the television without wondering when justice is going to catch up with him.
Nothing in this joker's paper can be believed, or ought to be taken seriously. Happily, the Mirror's circulation continues to decline rapidly, and I confidently expect Morgan to be unemployed when he finally goes to prison.
Nothing in this joker's paper can be believed, or ought to be taken seriously. Happily, the Mirror's circulation continues to decline rapidly, and I confidently expect Morgan to be unemployed when he finally goes to prison.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: AB, Canada
Posts: 420
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with your replies to this article, but I'm not sure what the problem would be with mandatory ID and luggage checks. Doesn't affect the individual's freedom any more than the same checks on commuter flights. Increases security for the crew (pilot). Makes things more difficult for the would be terrorist.
On the other hand, why bother with ID and luggage checks on any flight? Any of the reasons I could come up with to refute my notion on the sight seeing flights also work with any other flights.
On the other hand, why bother with ID and luggage checks on any flight? Any of the reasons I could come up with to refute my notion on the sight seeing flights also work with any other flights.
Gatvol
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: KLAS/TIST/FAJS/KFAI
Posts: 4,195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its so very typical of those "stick your head in the sand " group. I believe its also not allowed over Paris. I was told that by some of the Security Civile who gave me a ride in their Dauphin...........over Paris.
Im sure its coming to the U.S. Very unfortunate but its shows most all governments think alike......No common sense.
Im sure its coming to the U.S. Very unfortunate but its shows most all governments think alike......No common sense.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 5,197
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hands up anyone who's surprised there's not a single word in the Mirror rag today quoting what either the owner of BHH or the pilot said. And not a word from anyone giving the other side of the argument.
(No, of course I didn't buy it.)
Just patting themselves on the back for exposing this "FLIGHT SECURITY BREACH" - their words not mine - saying Transport Secretary Alistair Darling set up an inquiry after Daily Mirror journalists hired a helicopter without identity checks and hovered unchallenged over Parliament.
"hired a helicopter without ID checks?
What are we meant to do when we are given a name?
Are we to ask Special Branch or the Anti Terrorist Squad to run a check? And would they if we asked?
"hovered unchallenged over Parliament"
She's still repeating that lie, I see - but at least she's dropped the five minutes bit.
Mirror says "Government sources indicated security will be tightened for helicopter and light aircraft flights."
Funny how these sources don't have names. And if "government sources" did say such a thing, it's worrying they are so influenced by a tabloid with falling sales.
"The move comes amid demands for action to secure the skies over Britain's most important buildings."
Really? Demands by whom?
Ah - don't panic, "Liberal Democrat MPs". (I was a bit worried there for a moment ) who are also calling for (get this) "armed police or troops to be stationed on rooftops to protect sensitive buildings from an air attack.
The Transport Department said: "We have discussed restricting flights over Central London." Shame whoever said that (if anyone did) the spokesman didn't add 'and we rejected it as unnecessary'.
Let's hope they'll stand by their original sensible decision, and don't change their minds in response to this scare-mongering drivel from a tabloid.
(No, of course I didn't buy it.)
Just patting themselves on the back for exposing this "FLIGHT SECURITY BREACH" - their words not mine - saying Transport Secretary Alistair Darling set up an inquiry after Daily Mirror journalists hired a helicopter without identity checks and hovered unchallenged over Parliament.
"hired a helicopter without ID checks?
What are we meant to do when we are given a name?
Are we to ask Special Branch or the Anti Terrorist Squad to run a check? And would they if we asked?
"hovered unchallenged over Parliament"
She's still repeating that lie, I see - but at least she's dropped the five minutes bit.
Mirror says "Government sources indicated security will be tightened for helicopter and light aircraft flights."
Funny how these sources don't have names. And if "government sources" did say such a thing, it's worrying they are so influenced by a tabloid with falling sales.
"The move comes amid demands for action to secure the skies over Britain's most important buildings."
Really? Demands by whom?
Ah - don't panic, "Liberal Democrat MPs". (I was a bit worried there for a moment ) who are also calling for (get this) "armed police or troops to be stationed on rooftops to protect sensitive buildings from an air attack.
The Transport Department said: "We have discussed restricting flights over Central London." Shame whoever said that (if anyone did) the spokesman didn't add 'and we rejected it as unnecessary'.
Let's hope they'll stand by their original sensible decision, and don't change their minds in response to this scare-mongering drivel from a tabloid.
Last edited by Heliport; 1st Mar 2003 at 18:49.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: With my head in the clouds
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with you all. The "Mirror" is taking it to far..If someone wants to do harm, he'll be able to do it. It's easy to buy some explosives (so I am told), put it on your body, and push the button.....Nothing fancy (like choppers/planes), but very effective.
All the precautions nowadays are just to make the civilians feel "safe", nothing more. People must realise this as well as the so-called journalists of all these tabloids!
DJG
All the precautions nowadays are just to make the civilians feel "safe", nothing more. People must realise this as well as the so-called journalists of all these tabloids!
DJG
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: London
Posts: 2,916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For "Liberal Democrat MPs", read "Paul Keetch MP", the Member for Hereford and Lib Dem Defence spokesman.
According to the Mirror, he went on to say:
"The Mirror has exposed a huge gap in our security. It's no good having armed police on the front gates at Westminster if someone can hover in the sky only 1500ft up."
Which, roughly translated, means 'That should ensure me good coverage in the Mirror, and appeal to the Mirror readers in my constituency.'
Politicians are not stupid when it comes to headline- grabbing comments - and it won't have escaped Mr Keetch's attention that the journo who wrote today's nonsense [Day 2] is the Deputy Political Editor of the Mirror. Like it or not, tabloids sell the most newspapers in this country, and Press coverage is oxygen to politicians. Rather important to keep well in with the Deputy Political Editor of a national newspaper!
"The Government should think about an air exclusion zone around sensitive buildings.
Does Mr Keetch wish to see a 'water exclusion zone' along the Thames beside the Houses of Parliament? A terrorist could carry a much bigger bomb in a large boat than in a camera bag in a small helicopter.
An air exclusion zone? I don't know how long Mr Keetch has been an MP, but he clearly doesn't look up on his way to work, or when having tea on the terrace, because he's not noticed helicopters passing by. The Heli Route across London for single-engine helicopters is along the river. Or perhaps Mr Keetch is extremely hard of hearing? According to the yesterday's story, a JetRanger at 1500' caused "so much noise that guests at a special lunch attended by Lord Tebbit could hardly hear themselves speak." (It must be true - it was in the Mirror.)
I wonder what Lord Tebbit thinks of the Mirror's ideas - he was an airline pilot until he became an MP in the early 70's.
Perhaps the Mirror would like to see airliners prohibited from flying over London in case we have aother 9/11? It would close Heathrow whenever there's a Westerly wind (ie most days) but what does that matter, it would be quite a coup for the Mirror if their campaign closed one of the world's busiest international airports.
"We need to review how easy it is for people to hire helicopters and light aircraft - there must be proper identity checks."
Shame Mr Keetch didn't think this through before making such a suggestion. What 'proper identity checks' will he suggest when he has thought it through?
How would helicopter operators know if the ID given was genuine? Or, if genuine, whether the passenger was a terrorist?
We can turn up at Heathrow, buy a return ticket for an internal flight or the Irish Republic, and fly both legs without ever being asked to produce any form of ID - I did precisely that to/from Dublin only three weeks ago.
The point is, as many others have pointed out, that if terrorists wish to attack, there are far more effective ways to do it than hiring a small helicopter and carrying a bomb in a camera bag.
A suicide hit at a big building would almost certainly kill those on board, but it would be a total fluke if anyone else was killed or injured.
Yesterday's 'Voice of the Daily Mirror' editorial, accompanying the 'shock horror' nonsense, said 'We could have killed most of the Cabinet at the right time.' (No obvious comments, please!) I suppose you could - if they were all out on the terrace at the same time and there was a bomb in the helicopter - but a boat on the river would be so much more effective.
We can never defend ourselves from every means terrorists might use - and would we want to try? Personally, I think the price is too high. If we turn ourselves into 'Fortress Britain', the terrorists have won.
If anyone wishes to contact Mr Keetch to answer his points, his e-mail addresses are:
Constituency Office [email protected]
House of Commons [email protected]
Perhaps we should - MP's frequently refer to the 'enormous number' of letters of support they've received.
Note
In view of my earlier post, I should point out that the views I've expressed here are my own. They should not be taken as representing the views of Biggin Hill Helicopters.
Of course, if we're all wrong and there genuinely is a serious problem, it's a little worrying that the Lib-Dem Defence spokesman didn't notice the "huge gap in our security" until the Mirror 'exposed' it.
Mr Keetch would probably be the Defence Minister if the Lib-Dems won the next election. Doesn't inspire much confidence, does it?
According to the Mirror, he went on to say:
"The Mirror has exposed a huge gap in our security. It's no good having armed police on the front gates at Westminster if someone can hover in the sky only 1500ft up."
Which, roughly translated, means 'That should ensure me good coverage in the Mirror, and appeal to the Mirror readers in my constituency.'
Politicians are not stupid when it comes to headline- grabbing comments - and it won't have escaped Mr Keetch's attention that the journo who wrote today's nonsense [Day 2] is the Deputy Political Editor of the Mirror. Like it or not, tabloids sell the most newspapers in this country, and Press coverage is oxygen to politicians. Rather important to keep well in with the Deputy Political Editor of a national newspaper!
"The Government should think about an air exclusion zone around sensitive buildings.
Does Mr Keetch wish to see a 'water exclusion zone' along the Thames beside the Houses of Parliament? A terrorist could carry a much bigger bomb in a large boat than in a camera bag in a small helicopter.
An air exclusion zone? I don't know how long Mr Keetch has been an MP, but he clearly doesn't look up on his way to work, or when having tea on the terrace, because he's not noticed helicopters passing by. The Heli Route across London for single-engine helicopters is along the river. Or perhaps Mr Keetch is extremely hard of hearing? According to the yesterday's story, a JetRanger at 1500' caused "so much noise that guests at a special lunch attended by Lord Tebbit could hardly hear themselves speak." (It must be true - it was in the Mirror.)
I wonder what Lord Tebbit thinks of the Mirror's ideas - he was an airline pilot until he became an MP in the early 70's.
Perhaps the Mirror would like to see airliners prohibited from flying over London in case we have aother 9/11? It would close Heathrow whenever there's a Westerly wind (ie most days) but what does that matter, it would be quite a coup for the Mirror if their campaign closed one of the world's busiest international airports.
"We need to review how easy it is for people to hire helicopters and light aircraft - there must be proper identity checks."
Shame Mr Keetch didn't think this through before making such a suggestion. What 'proper identity checks' will he suggest when he has thought it through?
How would helicopter operators know if the ID given was genuine? Or, if genuine, whether the passenger was a terrorist?
We can turn up at Heathrow, buy a return ticket for an internal flight or the Irish Republic, and fly both legs without ever being asked to produce any form of ID - I did precisely that to/from Dublin only three weeks ago.
The point is, as many others have pointed out, that if terrorists wish to attack, there are far more effective ways to do it than hiring a small helicopter and carrying a bomb in a camera bag.
A suicide hit at a big building would almost certainly kill those on board, but it would be a total fluke if anyone else was killed or injured.
Yesterday's 'Voice of the Daily Mirror' editorial, accompanying the 'shock horror' nonsense, said 'We could have killed most of the Cabinet at the right time.' (No obvious comments, please!) I suppose you could - if they were all out on the terrace at the same time and there was a bomb in the helicopter - but a boat on the river would be so much more effective.
We can never defend ourselves from every means terrorists might use - and would we want to try? Personally, I think the price is too high. If we turn ourselves into 'Fortress Britain', the terrorists have won.
If anyone wishes to contact Mr Keetch to answer his points, his e-mail addresses are:
Constituency Office [email protected]
House of Commons [email protected]
Perhaps we should - MP's frequently refer to the 'enormous number' of letters of support they've received.
Note
In view of my earlier post, I should point out that the views I've expressed here are my own. They should not be taken as representing the views of Biggin Hill Helicopters.
Of course, if we're all wrong and there genuinely is a serious problem, it's a little worrying that the Lib-Dem Defence spokesman didn't notice the "huge gap in our security" until the Mirror 'exposed' it.
Mr Keetch would probably be the Defence Minister if the Lib-Dems won the next election. Doesn't inspire much confidence, does it?
Last edited by Flying Lawyer; 2nd Mar 2003 at 16:01.
Oops!
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: London
Posts: 159
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flying Lawyer,
As always, another outstanding post.
I and many of my colleagues, chums and fellow aviators would be more than happy to either e-mail or write to Mr Keetch regarding his comments. However, as we are all inevitably pushed for time should we perhaps draft a 'standard' letter that we could distribute amongst ourselves and others in order to bombard his office with a deluge of paperwork to deal with?
Experience tells me that unless we Really make the government think this thing through there will be an awful lot of ill-conceived, door-bolting going on. . . .
Best wishes,
G
I and many of my colleagues, chums and fellow aviators would be more than happy to either e-mail or write to Mr Keetch regarding his comments. However, as we are all inevitably pushed for time should we perhaps draft a 'standard' letter that we could distribute amongst ourselves and others in order to bombard his office with a deluge of paperwork to deal with?
Experience tells me that unless we Really make the government think this thing through there will be an awful lot of ill-conceived, door-bolting going on. . . .
Best wishes,
G
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Posts: 452
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Delta Julliet Golf
I agree with the intent of your post, but politely disagrees with your second paragraph.
"All the precautions nowadays are just to make the civilians feel "safe", nothing more."
Most 'precautions', only serve to enhance the anxiety. The ludicrous color-code alert system in the United States is a classic example. Political actions of this type conjure up the image of George Orwell's 1984;
~ but why regurgitate a previous and dearly departed thread.
I agree with the intent of your post, but politely disagrees with your second paragraph.
"All the precautions nowadays are just to make the civilians feel "safe", nothing more."
Most 'precautions', only serve to enhance the anxiety. The ludicrous color-code alert system in the United States is a classic example. Political actions of this type conjure up the image of George Orwell's 1984;
~ but why regurgitate a previous and dearly departed thread.