Security checks for crews are getting to the riduculous!
Re: Security checks for crews are getting to the riduculous!
Personally, as SLF, I don't mind the checks at all.The more thorough the better. Possibly like most people, I think if I've been checked thoroughly, then so will the Bad Guys.But they're not that well thought out, of course. They would probably act as a preventative to only the most dim witted extremist who is totally lacking in imagination, given the loopholes here and there. So I well understand aircrew irritation in this area.I don't see the point in confiscating potential lethal weapons, such as nail scissors, from the flight crew -or the pax, come to think of it - actually,I'd rather the crew were armed, since they have executive control over the aircraft.
The Silkair (and similar) events are relevant to this discussion only as a demonstration of that fact.
Read a letter in Flight a few years ago: the author, an ANZ capt., had come to the conclusion that if a 911 style event started to occur on his aircraft, he'd flip the seat belt switch on, wait a few seconds, stuff the nose full down, then up, then down etc and hope that disabled the offenders, without too much "collateral damage". Seems a pretty good approach. I want him flying my aircraft, thanks. And I dont mind if he's carrying scissors.
A few years ago someone tried to hijack an ANZ aircraft on the ground in Fiji. Hijacker was disabled by a well aimed blow by the captain, who had armed himself with a bottle of Teacher's whiskey (duty free of course). I'm not sure if the bottle survived the encounter.But it became world famous in NZ.
The Silkair (and similar) events are relevant to this discussion only as a demonstration of that fact.
Read a letter in Flight a few years ago: the author, an ANZ capt., had come to the conclusion that if a 911 style event started to occur on his aircraft, he'd flip the seat belt switch on, wait a few seconds, stuff the nose full down, then up, then down etc and hope that disabled the offenders, without too much "collateral damage". Seems a pretty good approach. I want him flying my aircraft, thanks. And I dont mind if he's carrying scissors.
A few years ago someone tried to hijack an ANZ aircraft on the ground in Fiji. Hijacker was disabled by a well aimed blow by the captain, who had armed himself with a bottle of Teacher's whiskey (duty free of course). I'm not sure if the bottle survived the encounter.But it became world famous in NZ.
ex-Tanker
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Luton Beds UK
Posts: 907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't need a weapon to kill you
There is one fundamental thinking error through the whole topic:
If a pilot wants his plane wrecked and everybody dead, he doesn't need a knife or a gun to do it. He has the safety or otherwise of everybody on the plane in his hands - can run off the runway on T/O, hit short on landing, overstress the ship - as has been done by suicidal pilots in the past.
Nevertheless a security check makes sense - why? Because it can be, that someone smuggles a bomb into crew luggage or crew bags (this has been done too).
What should the screeners therefore be seeking in Crew effects? Devices which would destroy an aeroplane.
What should they not be seeking? Hand weapons, scissors and spanners!
The problem of the suicidal / extreme pilot - fortunately not a common one - is one which cannot be solved at the security check - but must be addressed throughout his career by the company.
It would be a big help if crews and security checkers alike perceived this and then can work together for security instead of getting up each others' noses.
FC.
If a pilot wants his plane wrecked and everybody dead, he doesn't need a knife or a gun to do it. He has the safety or otherwise of everybody on the plane in his hands - can run off the runway on T/O, hit short on landing, overstress the ship - as has been done by suicidal pilots in the past.
Nevertheless a security check makes sense - why? Because it can be, that someone smuggles a bomb into crew luggage or crew bags (this has been done too).
What should the screeners therefore be seeking in Crew effects? Devices which would destroy an aeroplane.
What should they not be seeking? Hand weapons, scissors and spanners!
The problem of the suicidal / extreme pilot - fortunately not a common one - is one which cannot be solved at the security check - but must be addressed throughout his career by the company.
It would be a big help if crews and security checkers alike perceived this and then can work together for security instead of getting up each others' noses.
FC.
Moderate, Modest & Mild.
Thread Starter
security screening
Perhaps this thread (which originated on another tiny website that is not allowed to be mentioned here) is best summed up by stating that a lot of the time, effort, and money directed to checking whether the cockpit crew are carrying nail clippers, or Swiss Army knives, would be far better spent on checking the more likely areas terrorists can easily penetrate....checked baggage, galley supplies, cleaning equipment, refuellers - the list of people, and things, that are permitted airside access with a more or less cursory check.
As Few Cloudy (and many of us previously) has stated, Tech crew could walk on naked, and still do the same damage as Muhammed Atta did on 911. But for the FACT that crew members are there to check OTHER crew members, in addition to checking themselves.
And prior to that, the regulatory authority and the approved medico will also have assessed the crews' mental, and physical, condition.
As Few Cloudy (and many of us previously) has stated, Tech crew could walk on naked, and still do the same damage as Muhammed Atta did on 911. But for the FACT that crew members are there to check OTHER crew members, in addition to checking themselves.
And prior to that, the regulatory authority and the approved medico will also have assessed the crews' mental, and physical, condition.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Europe
Posts: 3,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Security checks for crews are getting to the riduculous!
Oh really, Kaptin M? Right, it's a topic never raised on pprune 
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...ight=screeners
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...ight=screeners
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...ight=screeners
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...ight=screeners
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...ight=screeners
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...ight=screeners
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...ight=screeners
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...ight=screeners
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...ight=screeners
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...ight=screeners
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...ight=screeners
Etc....
We really needed a tiny website to remind us of Security screening
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...ight=screeners
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...ight=screeners
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...ight=screeners
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...ight=screeners
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...ight=screeners
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...ight=screeners
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...ight=screeners
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...ight=screeners
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...ight=screeners
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...ight=screeners
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...ight=screeners
Etc....
We really needed a tiny website to remind us of Security screening
Moderate, Modest & Mild.
Thread Starter
Re: Security checks for crews are getting to the riduculous!
I don't recall stating this topic was never raised, flyblue - only that THIS thread (of 4 pages and >6,700 hits) owes its origin to a tiny website to which all reference has been deleted, despite the fact that any other PPRuNe newsworthy items acknowledge their roots.
Yes, I've strayed across to "there" - but I've still returned here, to PPRuNe.
Yes, I've strayed across to "there" - but I've still returned here, to PPRuNe.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Nowhere
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Security checks for crews are getting to the riduculous!
Originally Posted by Beausoleil
"see, even the captain has to go through this"
Wow!
Any objections I had as a "non-even the passenger that doesn't give a damn about who the captain is or how he is perceived" are now overcome.
Rotate on this!
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Aberdeen
Age: 64
Posts: 403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Security checks for crews are getting to the riduculous!
banana999......
I've read and re-read your last sentence over and over and now my head hurts.....
I've read and re-read your last sentence over and over and now my head hurts.....
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Pacific
Posts: 731
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Security checks for crews are getting to the riduculous!
I did not make my point, obviously. Markjoy and others should understand that airport security does NOT make you safer. It does NOTHING to stop a terrorist. Rarely does a terrorist use a real weapon to take over an airplane, they will use whatever is available and not banned by airport security; bottles, alcohol, small knives and razors etc, or use threats and devices such as tv remotes (a successful hijacking) and inhalers, or use nothing but their fists and a threatening attitude (Algeria).
You and all of us are going through that charade for NOTHING. It is a scam and the implied promise that if you allow yourself to be treated like a criminal you will be made safer is a disgraceful lie. The authorities should be held liable when their pathetic posturing is exposed, as it will be when the (fortunately very rare) next hijacking takes place despite them.
You and all of us are going through that charade for NOTHING. It is a scam and the implied promise that if you allow yourself to be treated like a criminal you will be made safer is a disgraceful lie. The authorities should be held liable when their pathetic posturing is exposed, as it will be when the (fortunately very rare) next hijacking takes place despite them.
Rotate on this!
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Aberdeen
Age: 64
Posts: 403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Security checks for crews are getting to the riduculous!
boof.....
er...why do think terrorists rarely use a weapon to take over an aircraft.....think about it...no really - have a long hard think about it...
er...why do think terrorists rarely use a weapon to take over an aircraft.....think about it...no really - have a long hard think about it...
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: South of the Watford Gap, East of Portland
Posts: 255
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Security checks for crews are getting to the riduculous!
boof....you are absolutely spot on with your assessment. Our problem is trying to get the idiots at places like the DoT (UK) to admit to the charade ('tho' I think they are so blinkered that they wouldn't or couldn't see the logic of your post) and have them apply affective but realistic and practical security measures.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Leicestershire
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Security checks for crews are getting to the riduculous!
As part of my degree I have been studying the security lessons learned from 9/11 and what changes could be made to prevent these occuring again. Alot of these security measures which have been introduced are not visible, for example federal marshalls aboard planes in the US and special branch screening of passenger manifests in the UK. Another change was the profiling of high priority individuals for screening. 9/11 was carried out by people in their middle ages, with qualifications and without a "background". This has posed problems for security as it considerably widens the possibilities for potential terrorists. I'm afraid if you think of yourselves (forget your occupation) you are all middle aged, with qualifications and obviously no "background". Therefore there is nothing to say if your not checked, that you may carry explosives or fire arms to give to someone else or to leave on the aircraft for someone on the return leg. Obviously some companies take this to the extreme removing nail files etc but thats life.
However, what has become evident are two main obvious questions which remain unanswered;
1) Why do airport owners (think about security alone here) encourage access to airport terminals and airports in general for the non-travelling public? Do these non-travellers really contribute significant revenue to the airports? In efforts to thwart attacks on airport customers it would be advantageous to exclude non-travelleing public from the airport. This helps to remove petty thiefs, potential terrorists and their intelligence gatherers. This creates a release of landside capacity allowing more businesses and more space for passengers. It is then possible to check people before they enter the airport and could then include all passengers and employees WITHOUT EXCEPTION.
2) The establishing of careers for frontline employees, means a lower turnover of staff and thus reduces the ease with which jobs can be obtained (i.e by news reporters). This means recruit people with academic qualifications, pay them a professional wage, value them as employees and provide career progression. This will improve staff moral and the quality of the job done. (Budget reform can easily allow this to happen) The expense of the higher wages is outweighed by the saving of re-training and re-hiring.
However, what has become evident are two main obvious questions which remain unanswered;
1) Why do airport owners (think about security alone here) encourage access to airport terminals and airports in general for the non-travelling public? Do these non-travellers really contribute significant revenue to the airports? In efforts to thwart attacks on airport customers it would be advantageous to exclude non-travelleing public from the airport. This helps to remove petty thiefs, potential terrorists and their intelligence gatherers. This creates a release of landside capacity allowing more businesses and more space for passengers. It is then possible to check people before they enter the airport and could then include all passengers and employees WITHOUT EXCEPTION.
2) The establishing of careers for frontline employees, means a lower turnover of staff and thus reduces the ease with which jobs can be obtained (i.e by news reporters). This means recruit people with academic qualifications, pay them a professional wage, value them as employees and provide career progression. This will improve staff moral and the quality of the job done. (Budget reform can easily allow this to happen) The expense of the higher wages is outweighed by the saving of re-training and re-hiring.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: london/UK
Posts: 499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Security checks for crews are getting to the riduculous!
boofhead
I'm afraid you are very wrong.
'Rarely does a terrorist use a real weapon to take over an airplane'
Obviously you don't remember the 70's. It may come as a suprise to many Americans, but terrorism has been about for a very long time. It did not start on 9/11.
Dawsons field? Enterbbe? Mogaditou? (excuse spelling!!!) None of those used real weapons? Oh yes they did!
Security in the US (having been through it long before 9/11) was a joke, and in no way compared to Europe, who had suffered from terrorist porblems for years.
Again, it may come as a suprise, but some of the items used on 9/11 would never have been allowed on a flight in Europe. However the US commonly allowed those items to be carried.
Quote:
"We hear about bad guys getting onto airplanes, but do we ever hear about them being stopped and apprehended at the security checkpoint?"
Yes we do, it was big news in the UK in the mid 80's, probably why it's not been tried since.
As for putting a Osi Bin Liner look alike in the queue and him being ignored? Well, yes, but the function is not the person it's what they are taking through.
I's been pointed out that there are reasons why crew are screened, if you don't wish to accept those, thats your affair. In the meantime, I'll feel a bit better if something is done, rather than nothing.
I do agree that whatever is done, nothing is 100%. But by having something in place it may deter an attack, and is infinatly better than nothing.
I'm afraid you are very wrong.
'Rarely does a terrorist use a real weapon to take over an airplane'
Obviously you don't remember the 70's. It may come as a suprise to many Americans, but terrorism has been about for a very long time. It did not start on 9/11.
Dawsons field? Enterbbe? Mogaditou? (excuse spelling!!!) None of those used real weapons? Oh yes they did!
Security in the US (having been through it long before 9/11) was a joke, and in no way compared to Europe, who had suffered from terrorist porblems for years.
Again, it may come as a suprise, but some of the items used on 9/11 would never have been allowed on a flight in Europe. However the US commonly allowed those items to be carried.
Quote:
"We hear about bad guys getting onto airplanes, but do we ever hear about them being stopped and apprehended at the security checkpoint?"
Yes we do, it was big news in the UK in the mid 80's, probably why it's not been tried since.
As for putting a Osi Bin Liner look alike in the queue and him being ignored? Well, yes, but the function is not the person it's what they are taking through.
I's been pointed out that there are reasons why crew are screened, if you don't wish to accept those, thats your affair. In the meantime, I'll feel a bit better if something is done, rather than nothing.
I do agree that whatever is done, nothing is 100%. But by having something in place it may deter an attack, and is infinatly better than nothing.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Security checks for crews are getting to the riduculous!
bjcc,
And the politicians wishing to be seen to be doing something can now rest easy.
It's not really a case of not wishing to accept them and I rather think you're missing the point somewhat. As has already been said a thousand times, screening and in some cases the over the top groping of crews to prevent us taking a fork into the flight deck is utterly pointless. That's why crew get hacked off with it. It's a fruitless and pointless waste of our time. It seems that trust is now a dirty word.
Having control of the aircraft already, there is no need to set about one's self with cutlery. As much as some will protest this, the kind of screening we currently have is essentially a power trip for security guards trying to humiliate pilots in front of the travelling public thereby giving themselves some sort of elevated status. I have no objection to being searched but it would be nice, as with everything nowadays, to have just a touch of common sense employed at the same time.
In the meantime, I'll feel a bit better if something is done, rather than nothing.
I's been pointed out that there are reasons why crew are screened, if you don't wish to accept those, thats your affair.
Having control of the aircraft already, there is no need to set about one's self with cutlery. As much as some will protest this, the kind of screening we currently have is essentially a power trip for security guards trying to humiliate pilots in front of the travelling public thereby giving themselves some sort of elevated status. I have no objection to being searched but it would be nice, as with everything nowadays, to have just a touch of common sense employed at the same time.
Last edited by Topslide6; 21st Jan 2006 at 14:24.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Security checks for crews are getting to the riduculous!
What the issue requires is good intelligence and that is, unfortunately, in short supply whether we are referring to government agencies or individuals employed to man the security checkpoints. The classic requirement for cosmetic application to cover the cracks is only to be expected from the mandarins who have to be seen to be doing something so that their political masters have a useful soundbite when the next scare is broadcast.
So far, no one has explained to me what is there to actually stop me or any other pilot or member of cabin crew from secreting the crash axe on our person and slipping back out to the departure lounge and handing that weapon over to someone with real malevolent intent who has already been screened? The system is seriously flawed and until the kind of investment that is required is forthcoming with intelligent profiling and more reliable biometric identification, we are going to continue with these silly debates.
So far, no one has explained to me what is there to actually stop me or any other pilot or member of cabin crew from secreting the crash axe on our person and slipping back out to the departure lounge and handing that weapon over to someone with real malevolent intent who has already been screened? The system is seriously flawed and until the kind of investment that is required is forthcoming with intelligent profiling and more reliable biometric identification, we are going to continue with these silly debates.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Strood, Kent
Posts: 731
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Security checks for crews are getting to the riduculous!
the kind of screening we currently have is essentially a power trip for the security guards to try and humiliate pilots in front of the travelling public thereby giving themselves some sort of elevated status.
no one has explained to me what is there to actually stop me or any other pilot or member of cabin crew from secreting the crash axe on our person and slipping back out to the departure lounge and handing that weapon over to someone with real malevolent intent who has already been screened
Oh, for a lottery win and to leave it all behind.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Security checks for crews are getting to the riduculous!
Kaptin M got it right. QUOTE:
........is best summed up by stating that a lot of the time, effort, and money directed to checking whether the cockpit crew are carrying nail clippers, or Swiss Army knives, would be far better spent on checking the more likely areas terrorists can easily penetrate....checked baggage, galley supplies, cleaning equipment, refuellers - the list of people, and things, that are permitted airside access with a more or less cursory check. UNQUOTE
So many items in airport shops are sealed at the factory and cannot be penetrated by x-ray - anything in a tin, for example, so the opportunities for "feeding" similar objects into the system containing weapons to retrieve after the security checks are much more appealing even to dumb would-be hijackers.
I think the more serious problem of security checks is that many airports now require trouser (or pants) belts to be removed. The sight of manly beer bellies flobbing along outside the confines of a tight belt is too much to contemplate. How long will it be before human rights groups start campaigning for separate Male and Female security checks, including flight crew?
........is best summed up by stating that a lot of the time, effort, and money directed to checking whether the cockpit crew are carrying nail clippers, or Swiss Army knives, would be far better spent on checking the more likely areas terrorists can easily penetrate....checked baggage, galley supplies, cleaning equipment, refuellers - the list of people, and things, that are permitted airside access with a more or less cursory check. UNQUOTE
So many items in airport shops are sealed at the factory and cannot be penetrated by x-ray - anything in a tin, for example, so the opportunities for "feeding" similar objects into the system containing weapons to retrieve after the security checks are much more appealing even to dumb would-be hijackers.
I think the more serious problem of security checks is that many airports now require trouser (or pants) belts to be removed. The sight of manly beer bellies flobbing along outside the confines of a tight belt is too much to contemplate. How long will it be before human rights groups start campaigning for separate Male and Female security checks, including flight crew?
Gatvol
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: KLAS/TIST/FAJS/KFAI
Posts: 4,195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Security checks for crews are getting to the riduculous!
had a small (10mm) ring spanner that I had used to fix my roof rack and had forgotten that it was in my briefcase.
On the PAX floor security is insane. In the Cargo floor there is none.......
Does not make me feel any better........
At Least I can now transport, new and unfueled Zippos in my checked baggage.. Someone found out the only way they can hurt anybody is if they get hit in the head with one. That does not apply to screeners.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Pacific
Posts: 731
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Security checks for crews are getting to the riduculous!
bjcc, you are reading what you want to read in my post.
Of course we need security, but it need not be any different from what it was prior to 9/11. That level was adequate to stop the major problems with guns, knives etc. However now, as then, only 75 percent of guns are being found according to TSA records, and only 40 percent of knives, so really, come on, what use is it? No matter how onerous the security is, they will not get them all and the terrorist only has to win one; we have to win them all! The ramp up in security is not working, it is not worth the extra effort, we are not getting value for our money, it should be rolled back to a more reasonable, acceptable level, since it has other detrimental effects on passenger confidence, crew patience and in fact the very survival of the industry. "Security" is a bigger problem now than the safety it was meant to provide.
In the 70s and 80s, yes, there were problems, but they were localised and in those countries, with obvious official support, guns and explosives were provided. The same can happen now, since the last way they would want to bring weapons on board would be through the passenger security lines. Come, on, think about it. Much more easy to bring them in as part of the airplane's kit via the back door, which is, despite some claims, porous and will remain so since examining every mechanic's tool box, or catering box etc, would shut down any major airport and there is no equipment for detecting explosives on the fly. In any case, we face different dangers now and need different ways to protect ourselves. Making crew and passengers criminals is NOT the way to do it. Pandering to the fearful is window dressing and that is all it is.
I accept that some places will need enhanced security, such as Israel, but all WE need is enough of an effort to thwart the dangers we practically face. I would be all for what is happening now, if it worked, but IT DOES NOT.
Thus, accept the fact that they WILL get on board, and lets put our efforts to where they should be focused: The airplanes.
Of course we need security, but it need not be any different from what it was prior to 9/11. That level was adequate to stop the major problems with guns, knives etc. However now, as then, only 75 percent of guns are being found according to TSA records, and only 40 percent of knives, so really, come on, what use is it? No matter how onerous the security is, they will not get them all and the terrorist only has to win one; we have to win them all! The ramp up in security is not working, it is not worth the extra effort, we are not getting value for our money, it should be rolled back to a more reasonable, acceptable level, since it has other detrimental effects on passenger confidence, crew patience and in fact the very survival of the industry. "Security" is a bigger problem now than the safety it was meant to provide.
In the 70s and 80s, yes, there were problems, but they were localised and in those countries, with obvious official support, guns and explosives were provided. The same can happen now, since the last way they would want to bring weapons on board would be through the passenger security lines. Come, on, think about it. Much more easy to bring them in as part of the airplane's kit via the back door, which is, despite some claims, porous and will remain so since examining every mechanic's tool box, or catering box etc, would shut down any major airport and there is no equipment for detecting explosives on the fly. In any case, we face different dangers now and need different ways to protect ourselves. Making crew and passengers criminals is NOT the way to do it. Pandering to the fearful is window dressing and that is all it is.
I accept that some places will need enhanced security, such as Israel, but all WE need is enough of an effort to thwart the dangers we practically face. I would be all for what is happening now, if it worked, but IT DOES NOT.
Thus, accept the fact that they WILL get on board, and lets put our efforts to where they should be focused: The airplanes.
Re: Security checks for crews are getting to the riduculous!
Passed through BOS yesterday. Took off my uniform jacket as requested and walked through the arch as usual. Pretty lady waiting at the other side put her hand up and said "Stop - where's you ID?" "On my jacket " I replied. "Go back and get it!" She shouted, but by then it (and my flight case) had appeared at the end of the scanner so I pointed that out to her. She did the human equivalent of a computer lock-up and seemed unable to speak so I just pushed past her.........
ex-Tanker
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Luton Beds UK
Posts: 907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Security never routes out a terrorist?
Actually there is an occasion where a bunch of terrorists got found out while passing security - in Athens.
They then went ape****, got out all their machine guns etc. and proceeded to have a blood bath of all in the vicinity.
(This included a Swissair crew passing through by the way. The Captain was off sick for some considerable time getting his leg fixed and was none too happy when Swissair informed him that he would be loosing a couple of weeks holiday due to being sick for too long...)
FC.
They then went ape****, got out all their machine guns etc. and proceeded to have a blood bath of all in the vicinity.
(This included a Swissair crew passing through by the way. The Captain was off sick for some considerable time getting his leg fixed and was none too happy when Swissair informed him that he would be loosing a couple of weeks holiday due to being sick for too long...)
FC.
Last edited by Few Cloudy; 17th Jan 2006 at 09:23.