Originally Posted by
Scubatooth
ah more words of wisdom from "Im more american then you because i work for TSA" Ron
Try and stay on topic. Put your personal opinion back in your pockets please and keep it there, it has no place here and tends to get one in hot water with the moderators.
Originally Posted by
Scubatooth
BTW JPATS isnt left field, I have met more then a few of there marshall's so i have a good insight to what goes on, then again my clearance allows it as well.
To me its “left field”. JPATS may mean something to you, but nothing to me. Maybe I know it by a different acronym or name. What is JPATS?
Originally Posted by
Scubatooth
TSA has no jurisdiction over them and digging in there business is likely to end up having the business end of a pistol or CSM that appears out of thin air, especially there air movements. trust me I witnessed one incident were a airport employee wondered to close to the aircraft and in the blink of the eye code browned as there were 5 marshalls pointing CSMs at this guy and they were charging him. Those guys dont mess around when it come to op sec.
TSA has jurisdiction over all commercial aircraft arriving or departing from a commercial airport within the confines of the United States and its territories, regardless of who its passengers are or who may have contracted the flight. TSA Screeners may not have contact, but you can bet your last and very bottom dollar that TSA has its hands in the process somewhere.
Originally Posted by
Scubatooth
Screening of the aircraft and crew, nope as TSA is not at all points of access at airports. Background checks are meaningless as has been proven by the litney of reports that keep poring out about the professional and highly trained TSA.
See above.
As for background checks… Are you under the impression that they are anything like a crystal ball? That a background check can predict the future actions of
any individual, anywhere? Sounds to me like you might have some unrealistic expectations of what a background check actually accomplishes.
Originally Posted by
Scubatooth
You think TSA screens patients as they are loaded on scene calls where a aircraft goes to pick up a critical patient....nope. TSA employees attempting or interfering with a medical air or ground crew are likely to find themselves in a world of hurt and im not talking physically either. TSA tried there Stunts with GA and failed miserably, partly due to the efforts of the air medical transport groups, and the AOPA. TSA cant do its base mission with any level of competence let alone the creep that keeps on going.
Did I say that “Screeners” had cleared the aircraft? Are commercial aircraft commonly used for the transport of “critical patient”’s? What makes you think that our two obviously differing conversations have anything to do with one another? I am discussing commercial aviation, where are you, and why have you gone off in that direction after a reasonable response to your claim of “BS”?
As for General Aviation, failed? Not hardly. Take a few moments this time to actually look at the CFR’s I provided for you instead of discounting them out of hand.
Originally Posted by
Scubatooth
as for the going on the tarmac, I know this first hand because i have done it many times and the airports dont know me from a hole in the ground, and my employer hasnt given them anything either, and they cant without my written permission for which they dont have. I have pulled up (Code 1 or Code 3) to the gate rolled the lights and whalen and had the gate opened, didnt talk to a soul, the ambulance was not inspected by anyone, and i was allowed unescorted onto the tarmac. The "sterile area" has more holes in it then swiss cheese, and the theater act is bad kabuki at best.
Earth calling SCUBA! Come in SCUBA!! Wow, interesting tangent there dude. Must have been one heck of a ride, you seem to have enjoyed going off on it. Can we safely assume from your references to Code 1 and Code 3 that you are trying to get us to believe that you are either with the local fire department or are some kind of a local LEO?
If that is the case then you should also be aware of the following. Both FD and LEO require extensive background checks before being sworn to duty. Both are usually run by municipalities or cities, and as such have “Mutual Support/Aid” agreements with airport LEO’s and fire departments. Airport LEO agencies “know” that local LEO’s and FD personnel have had these extensive background checks, have a record of the most likely individuals to respond to airport incidents, and have already exchanged the needed background information for an individual LEO’s or FD members access to the AOA and SIDA.
Now, as for “pulled up to the gate rolled the lights and whalen”: (not sure what a “whalen” is, but what the heck…) A 38,000 pound fire truck is pretty distinctive, and is most likely not driven by the average knucklehead from down the block. Same with a local LEO vehicle, both distinctive enough to be allowed through an exterior access gate without questions during a known emergency. Pull up there in your Hyundai Elantra and the response you get from the airport agencies is most likely going to be quite different. Heck, try and get into the sterile area without going through the proper channels, even with a uniform and a gun, and life gets very interesting very quickly for a local LEO or FD.
So here’s the deal Scuba. Anyone who puts 30 seconds of logical thought into this and has even a minimal background in security related issues, can easily sink the little red wagon you are trying to ride through this thread. I’m sure its entertaining for you, but the tangents have already taken far to much of my time to be of any use.
On a side note: I read a news article the other day that pretty much stated that if someone has
any emotional investment in a position that no matter the clarity or number of facts that prove them wrong it is nearly impossible to get them to admit that they are in error. Facts only entrench them deeper into a faulty position and do nothing to prove to them their error. SO, based on that I’m not going to bother trying to convince you any further. You are welcome to your opinions sir, no matter how wrong they are.
FireBug4 said:
I don't disbelieve anything that you have posted.
I do, it does not pass the smell test.