Immature Cabin Crew

On Tue, 30 Sep 2003 13:07:30 +1000, Craig Welch
wrote:

On Tue, 30 Sep 2003 11:48:36 +1000, bex
wrote:

Immature ??? Would you allow your plane in the air if you suspected one
of your PAX was a threat to the safety of the aircraft, those on board
or on the ground? I doubt it!

No, I wouldn't. But I believe I have sufficient maturity not to
suspect people of being terrorists just because they speak a foreign
language.

as do QANTAS cabin crew


Petzl
--
LET'S LOOK OUT FOR AUSTRALIA
http://www.nationalsecurity.gov.au/
Protecting our way of life from terrorist threat

Petzl wrote:

as do QANTAS cabin crew

Come on.. It is now after the fact and there is NO evidence suggesting
they are terrorists. They apparently guest of the Australian government
and were accompanied by an Air Force officer. Given this information,
what do you think they could have been doing that would make the cabin
crew think they were terrorists?

"Craig Welch" wrote in message
...


SNIP


What is the connexion between Dixon and Reith? At least Reith helped
sort out the bludging, malingering, festering wharfies.

That's enough Craig !

IF, Peter Reith helped sort out a few Board Rooms as well, then and only
then, would your statement hold any value.

I presume you are a *work slave* and not use to a 40 hour week and time with
your family and uncertain about your retirement and any working conditions
you enjoy ? And a mortgage that is keeping you hog tied to a desk ?

Pray, child, tell me what is so wonderful about your globalise world; your
rationalised Company; your CEO taking home 100 pays per week; the
disappearing fair go community and the part you enjoy playing in it.

I'll be ever so happy sport, to have you convince me, that your brave new
world is better than the one I help build.

DN


SNIP

Craig

On Mon, 29 Sep 2003 15:38:05 GMT in rec.travel.air, "Brad Porter"
wrote:

I rest my case.

you made absolutely NO case, except to show what a dickhead YOU
are.

"Crash N Burn" wrote in message
...
"mrtravel" wrote in message
. ..
{snip}
In the USA they are so scared to be seen as profiling those who are most
likely to be problems, they search
grandmothers, children, US military, and pilots, in fact anyone travelling
on a one-way ticket is scrutinised.

So I wonder why the trend is for the vendor to offer one way fares? And if
you think I'm kidding, go look at some of the major players around. Bet you
can get a one way ticket to anyones hell on earth I guess.... :-D

johnie wrote:

"Crash N Burn" wrote in message
...

"mrtravel" wrote in message

. ..
{snip}

In the USA they are so scared to be seen as profiling those who are most

likely to be problems, they search

grandmothers, children, US military, and pilots, in fact anyone travelling

on a one-way ticket is scrutinised.

So I wonder why the trend is for the vendor to offer one way fares? And if
you think I'm kidding, go look at some of the major players around. Bet you
can get a one way ticket to anyones hell on earth I guess.... :-D


Not only that, but we have been searching people of all ages for years.
And given the recent discoveries at Gitmo (Guatanamo), are you
suggesting military shouldn't be searched?

On Tue, 30 Sep 2003 07:09:18 GMT, "johnie"
wrote:


"Crash N Burn" wrote in message
...
"mrtravel" wrote in message
...
{snip}
In the USA they are so scared to be seen as profiling those who are most
likely to be problems, they search
grandmothers, children, US military, and pilots, in fact anyone travelling
on a one-way ticket is scrutinised.

So I wonder why the trend is for the vendor to offer one way fares? And if
you think I'm kidding, go look at some of the major players around. Bet you
can get a one way ticket to anyones hell on earth I guess.... :-D

As is often the case, the real impact of this is to expend time and
effort on people are unlikely to be of any interest.

For example, if you are flying on American Airlines, via DFW, and the
connection breaks for some reason, they are going to involuntarily
re-route you, and issue you a ticket that says it is involuntary
re-route. It is impossible to plan to be involuntarily re-routed, and
in fact you may not even have much control over how you get re-routed.
Unfortunately the profile software cannot tell the difference beween
such a ticket, and someone who just bought a one way ticket for cash..
It is both a reservation and ticket issued at the last minute, as far
as the "system" is concerned.

If you book a domestic sector from a Foreign airline, for example,
have a connection across Los Angeles to say Denver, and you spend a
few days in Los Angeles before going on to Denver, because you didn't
make the reservation through a the Domestic Office of the US airline,
you must be a terrorist. So If I have a QANTAS ticket with open
sectors on a US airline, I can call the US carrier in the US, and put
up with a load of garbage. They want all the details of your ticket,
including your 1st born before they will make a reservation, and of
course the normal reservations people cannot make such a reservation,
you have to call a special desk, that works as Americans say, 'bankers
hours'. If you waste that 30 minutes, you won't be a selectee.

Or you can call QANTAS, who knows what the ticket says, and they will
make the reservations in about 30 seconds, and you will be a selected
for addition searches and checks everytime you board an aircraft.



Another way to get picked off is to be a no checked luggage passenger.
If you arrive early enough from an inbound connection to make an
earlier flight, you must be a terrorist for some reason.

My only comment at this point, is that if I figured this stuff out, it
is a safe bet I am not the only one to figure it out. The problem
with such hard and fast rules that are so obvious, is that every one
learns them quickly, so a lot of time and effort goes into looking at
passengers who are very unlikely to be of ay real interest.

There is nothing random about it at all. Ergo, a smart terrorist
could saturate the US system with people they know it will pick up
for example, booking the domestic reservation through a foreign flag
carrier), and greatly reduce the chances of resources being invested
in looking for a real threat. I.E. if you fill up the system with
'selectees', there is no capacity left for random checks.

A long standing observation: Most Security Systems promote insecurity.
The more hard and fast rules you create, the less useful they are.

If you are expecting technology to replace good judgement, don't hold
your breath. NObody has been able to make it work yet. Political
problems require political solutions, not technical solutions.

"Miguel Cruz" wrote in message ...
Crash N Burn wrote:
"mrtravel" wrote:
Or Oklahoma City

However, those non-Arabs terrorists seem to attack those having some
involvement in their local issue.

What connection did Tim McVeigh have to Oklahoma City or anyone in it?

http://www.rickross.com/reference/mc...mcveigh10.html

Just search using google. Lots of hits, much to read.

McVeigh blamed the US government, his government, for lots of things.

There were a few cases where some religious cults (NOT Muslim) in the USA would not surrender
to marshalls even after months of standoffs, and the US marshalls went in with guns and killed a number,
but the best evidence suggests the cult leaders were more responsible for the deaths than the government
agents. McVeigh did not see it that way....


miguel
--
Hit The Road! Photos and tales from around the world: http://travel.u.nu
Site remodeled 10-Sept-2003: Hundreds of new photos, easier navigation.

"Ritwik Bhattacharya" wrote in message ...


Crash N Burn wrote:
"mrtravel" wrote in message . ..

AJC wrote:

On Mon, 29 Sep 2003 18:58:12 +0100, wrote:


You ought to pop over to Belfast for the weekend.


Or the Basque region of Spain, or Corsica, or Peru, or Colombia, etc.,
etc.
--==++AJC++==--

Or Oklahoma City



However, those non-Arabs terrorists seem to attack those having some involvement in their local
issue.

I think, as far as Arabs are concerned, the US can be characterized as
"those having some involvement in their local issue", the "local issue"
being the terrible mess the Middle East is in today. Not that it

The US did not make the original mess, their arrogance just made it much worse than it
otherwise needed to be. Go back to the original airline hijackers... a few madmen, mostly
Arabs, a few misguided souls trying to escape something or other. The US main historical
error was probably propping up some Really Bad Governments in the middle east.

BTW, what is your opinion of the Taliban? Should they have been left alone? As for Iraq,
Saddam gets the last laugh on the US in a black sort of way.

justifies terrorism, but "justifies" it as much as the Irish, for
example, are "justified" in carrying out their acts of terrorism.

You have some validity, so you would then accept if the following happened on the same basis?
a) North American Indians attacked all French, English, and Spanish people
b) South American Indians attacked all Spanish and Portugese people
c) Aborigines decided to randomly kill English settlers, and for that matter anyone who was unfriednly
enough to befriend English settlers
d) ....

The Irish kill other Irish and their British "occupiers" so I would class that as a localised conflict. Now
if the IRA launched terror attacks on Irish expats in Sydney (etc) they join the Arab terrorists in fact as
well as spirit.




Ritwik

"johnie" wrote in message ...

"Crash N Burn" wrote in message
...
"mrtravel" wrote in message
. ..
{snip}
In the USA they are so scared to be seen as profiling those who are most
likely to be problems, they search
grandmothers, children, US military, and pilots, in fact anyone travelling
on a one-way ticket is scrutinised.

So I wonder why the trend is for the vendor to offer one way fares? And if
you think I'm kidding, go look at some of the major players around. Bet you
can get a one way ticket to anyones hell on earth I guess.... :-D

Don't confuse marketing and being searched at the airports!