You might want to read this.
Sep 13, 4:47 AM EDT
Colombia Questions Its Airline Security
By DAN MOLINSKI
Associated Press Writer




BOGOTA, Colombia (AP) -- Colombia questioned its own airline security measures and ordered an immediate review after a father in a wheelchair dodged a checkpoint and smuggled grenades onto a plane.

The father and his son surrendered five hours after commandeering the Aires airliner around midday Monday after it departed from the southern city of Florencia on a flight headed to Colombia's capital, Bogota.

The plane, with at least 24 people aboard, including an American, landed in Bogota after the hijackers made a radio call to air traffic control indicating they had taken control, said Gen. Edgar Lesmez, chief of the Colombian Air Force.

The hijackers allowed government negotiators and a Roman Catholic priest to board while the twin-propeller plane sat on the tarmac. All passengers and crew were eventually freed unharmed before the hijackers, 42-year-old Porfirio Ramirez and his 22-year-old son, Linsen Ramirez, gave up and were arrested.

The older Ramirez boarded the plane in a wheelchair that was too large to pass through an airport metal detector, and he was not patted down by security agents, Luis Octavio Rojas, director of the Florencia airport, told The Associated Press.

A statement late Monday from President Alvaro Uribe's office said the Civil Aviation authority must find out "what allowed someone to take advantage of his disabled condition to pass through the security checks ... with grenades."

Rojas acknowledged his airport security agents only gave the elder Ramirez "a visual inspection."
Uribe's office said: "Remember that nobody is exempt or excluded from security controls at airports."
According to the government statement, the elder hijacker said he hijacked the plane to bring attention to a case in which he was partially paralyzed by a police bullet during a raid on his house some 14 years ago and had unsuccessfully sought government compensation.

Sen. Carlos Moreno, who helped negotiate the standoff, said a $43,000 check was handed to the hijackers as part of a "deal" between the government and the hijackers, but the government would not honor it.

No concessions were ever made to the hijackers, the government said.
Attorney General Mario Iguaran said the elder Ramirez led the hijacking and if convicted faces 25 to 40 years in prison for aggravated hijacking of an aircraft. He expressed sympathy for the man's case, but added: "Unfortunately he has to be brought to justice."

The elder Ramirez, speaking to reporters before being transferred to a jail cell, said he has "no reason to regret" his actions Monday and said that during the negotiation the government "said they would help me" and that they "would give me an indemnity, because that's what I need."

The government said Monday it plans to review his request for compensation, but said this would not affect the severe charges he faces.

A U.S. citizen was among the passengers on the hijacked flight, said a U.S. official in Bogota, who spoke on condition of anonymity. No other details were available on the American

Regarding the "extremely secretive" aspect:

That is actually not entirely true ... at least it was not until more recently. Even in the case of 9/11, it was Mohammed Atta who was the least willing to trust "outsiders" or even "insiders" to do much or know much. KSM, on the other hand, had talked about "his plan" to even his second cousins' in-law's nephew and the corner grocery store guy whom he new years before in Kuwait but had not met for several years. OBL had talked to his daughter-in-law about "the idea" in the presence of an Arab former US intelligence asset around the spring of 2001. Even some American idiots shook OBL's hands -- with OBL's knowledge that they were American -- in the months and years between when OBL became wanted by our government and when 9/11 happened.

Grandmothers are used, wittingly and unwittingly, as mules for drugs and drug money often enough. Why not for bomb components suddenly handed over at an airside drop-off/hand-off? :(

Actually, they're not so much concerned with metal in your shoes as other type of plastik explosives, and non-metal material. To avoid the hassle now, I just take my shoes off - regardless of the type. It's a pain, but letting TSA raise my blood pressure over it is just not worth it. TSA and the security farce has us FF by the short hairs and there's really nothing we can do about it! Complain yes, and goody, we get to go through personal screening!

redjr... :D

Whenever I return to the US for my first domestic flight, the following thoughts now come to mind: This idiotic shoe obsession?!?!? Again?!?!? Only in America. :(

C'mon Bart! We're not in the Army anymore. Kick in with the vernacular. 'kay?

The vernacular for this forum, the Women Traveller's forum or another one? :D

Hahaha! :D

Bart might think he's still a greensuiter writing OPORD's.

M8

Wow, not only are you telling me what part of the screening process you should have to go through and what parts are "silly", now your telling me what I can and cannot see on the x-ray and how "I" interpret what I see. Since you all know so much, why don't you take over security so it gets done right. Don't tell me what I think when I see something on the x-ray. You don't know.

Fact is, with the exception of the 'puffers,' you are using the same equipment pre-9/11.

Secondly, what do you think some of us look at while we're participating in the dog-and-pony show known as the shoe carnival?

No, that doesn't singularly make someone an expert on the x-ray machines, but there is a lot more information out there, absorbed both pre-and-post-9/11, about those x-ray machines.

I'm sure you look at the x-ray. But you don't know how I'm interpreting what I'm seeing. We have had better training than before 9-11. And I do have some experience looking for explosives, so please don't tell me what I see, and I won't tell you what you see.

No one is telling you what you see. However, the x-ray will not tell you there are explosives present. You might be able to determine they are there, but the x-ray is not to be confused with a mass spectrometer or a gas chromatogram. Because plastic explosives all by themselves are malleable and can be molded into just about any shape, I'm perfectly willing to bet some cash that screeners will not notice them unless there are other indicators present.

Oh my God, just give me that chance. Right after I exit several of your bosses from the building while using their heads to open the door, I'll have airport screening operating properly and respecting people's civil liberties. I can do better than they can. Heck, monkeys banging on typewriters could write a better SOP than the pinheads currently doing so.

What percentage of things passing through the x-ray are swabbed for ETD sampling. Yeah, that's right, less than 1%. Put explosives in carryon, perhaps in toothpaste container. Chances of a swab? Pretty darn low.

You're absolutely right, I was just making up that whole body cavity thing! It's impossible to pull off the smuggling of explosives in such a manner! Please, pay no further attention to such works of fiction. I must have imagined such an improbable, stinky scenario.

You've got issues, pal. Wish I had your address so I could mail you that Playmobil security checkpoint toy. Then you could use them as voodoo dolls and spend your time sticking needles in them.

Thanks for the insiteful reply. ;)

Yes, I have issues. Issues with shoddy security that harasses rather than actually (gasp!) secures.

Problem: It is easy to get explosives past the checkpoint.

Solution: Let's have the Shoe Carnival!

Umm.... that doesn't fix the problem!

Hey, can't hurt! $5 billion, please. Kindly surrender your civil liberties too.

:confused:

I'm sorry but Less02 was telling me that he looks at the x-ray while going through security, as does everyone pretty much, and that from what he see's I couldn't tell if there were explosives in a bag without the other components. And I'm saying that yes, I could identify that there may be explosives. Everyone that operates an x-ray has their own interpretation of what they see. While every bag that I would have checked would not have explosives in them, one with an explosive in them without the other components would definitely be checked. And therefore they would be found. Could everyone find them? I have no idea. But I could, as I've had some experience with them. I'm not saying the x-ray would find them, as the machine itself does nothing but show a picture. They are only as good as the person operating them. I'm just speaking for myself here. I'm confident in my ability when it comes to the x-ray.

Oh I almost forgot. If you can do a better job with airline security I"m all for you being the head of it. Your absolutely right, the current people leave an awful lot to be desired, and I'm willing to give you a chance. It's a shame that what I think really doesn't matter.

PM to you. See my point?

I have a question for all the frequent flyers. Why when I take a bag to do a search, do some people ask me if their bag alarmed? The x-ray does not alarm anything. Its all up to the operator to decide if the bag needs to be hand searched. One guy told me that his bag alarms every time. And why do alot of pregnant woman not want to go throught the WTMD? I asked one and she said that the doctor told her not to have herself exposed to x-rays. X-rays? Its a metal detector. I will pat them down as everyone has that option. But alot of people seem to be confused as to what our epuipment does.

Because not everyone is an engineer, and therefore they do not understand technology.

As for the pregnant woman, the doctor might have said something. Your metal detectors are probably based on induction, so I'll let Spiff give you the details on that.

M8

You don't have to be an engineer to know that an x-ray machine takes x-rays and a WTMD is just that. I think we all need to take the time to explain to people exactly what we're doing. That would alleviate alot of fear that people have, and make the process a lot less intimidating for some.

I am not afraid or intimated ... just annoyed and pissed off. :D

btw, you cracked me up ... you know what a shoe looks like. LOL! I wouldn't be surprised if screeners had nightmares about shoes with all the shoe checking they do daily. :)

Oh c'mon! You love it. Admit it, you have a foot fetish :D

M8

Not sure if your making fun of me or not, a little tired tonight. But you probably are since I seem to amuse you. What I meant was that we know what shoes look like on the x-ray. PS. Only a few nightmares about shoes chasing me.

Nope, not making fun of you at all and not getting into the whole explosives thing as Spiff already covered that. It just made me chuckle. :)

Just as a FWIW on detecting things... I've been out of IAD 5 times in the last two months- Same carry on bag, same briefcase. Last week I was told I had a lighter in the bag, and one in the briefcase. I told them have a ball, as I had, to the best of my knowledge, taken the lighters out of everything; and I showed her the matches I was carrying with my cigarettes.

Guess what- They found two lighters :eek: I was embarassed, until I got to thinking about it... One was buried in the bottom of a pocket in the center of the briefcase, the other had slipped inside a bag of mints in the carry on bag.

Then I got a little ticked- 5 times and this was the FIRST catch? So at least 15 screeners had looked at those two bags- IAD, LAX, SFO, NRT, SYD and not a single one caught anything???? I asked for the TSA Supervisor, they refused to get him, so I went and talked to the Duty Airport PD Sgt. He laughed and said he was not surprised... They had seen people come through with knives and other assorted paraphenalia quite a bit.

I think the only thing you are really doing with the "new" screening process is keeping the honest people honest... :rolleyes: Just like the PC number of certain ethnicities you can screen per flight, so you "have" to check the little old ladies, or take the Medal of Honor away from an 86 year old veteran named Joe Foss and pass it around, then say he can't have it back because it has sharp edges. :mad: Give us a break.

From reading what some TSA screeners have posted, the lighters are difficult to detect in the first place. And even if one is detected, they may not be apt to send the bag for secondary. So I can't really blame them for this at all.

On the other hand, I carry a Swiss Army "instrument". Why I call it instrument instead of knife is because I have broken off the blade and blunted the end of the scissors. Most airports don't notice it, but IAH usually sees it and pulls it out. They say that I can't take it on board and I say why. Well because it is a knife and can't be in carry-on. Don't assume things they are told. Finally they realize that it is okay to be airside. My point is, that many times the object that appears to be a prohibited item on the x-ray is not found. EWR didn't see it this week, but they sure didn't like my non-criteria shoes (at least I only got an ETD swab).

I inadvertantly left a two-inch thick (wide) Swiss Army Knife in my briefcase twice. Both times, I found it at my destination after leaving home. Simply put -- DEN TSA missed it twice.

I thought TSA folks couldn't turn down a requst to speak with a supervisor. My advice is to find the nearest TSAer near a podium, chances are he/she is a supervisor. Also, looks for the three stripes on the epaulet -- that's a supervisor (two stripes is the team leader).

Understood ND Sol, while I don't disagree in pricipal, they are still not doing their jobs- Lighters are strictly prohibited, according to their own literature!

Less O2- They will do anything they can get away with at IAD- Too busy is always the excuse... Same thing with the ALL shoes mandate- It's not required under CFR49 unless the threatcon is raised, but if you ask them the direct question and push for an answer, amazingly you seem to be "randomly" picked for a more indepth screening every time... :rolleyes:

Hmmm. This thread is getting repetitive. Time for me to unsubscribe :p

From what I have read, the TSA did not want the lighter prohibition. Remember it was a couple of Democratic senators that pushed for it as an attachment to another bill. It passed. What does dismay me about the implementation is that the TSA went further than the law required in not only banning butane lighters, but all lighters (eg. Zippos).

The fact is that certain ethnic minorities get the haraSSSSment screening at a higher percentage than Americans of European ethnicities. ;) So while you see "PC police" at work, the TSA is actually "extra-"screening "certain ethnicities" far more frequently than the general population and also screening them far more thoroughly/often as percentage of their trips. I don't see what the complaint is -- unless it relates to advocating an apartheid system of racist profiling that faces resistance. Foreigners get screened per the haraSSSSment standard more often too. Maybe the lists should be expanded? I think not!

Yes, the "'new' screening process" at the WTMD-area security checkpoints in the US are bothering "honest people" more than anyone.

Sorry, or as they say in Israel: Sleecha, but your story does not fly. I've traveled TLV many time and also in SDV and ETH. Never, not once, have I seen armed soldiers at an israeli airport who were not regular pax or waiting for their familly to land. In Israel, soldiers are everywhere obly because there is a draft and they often go about personal chores n uniform and armed. El Al security and TLV security in general is not uniformed and if armed they have nothing visible. I espessialy doubt that there would be armed ISRAELI soldiers with Uzis in Amsterdam. Oh, and besides that, most Israeli soldiers carry the M-16 assault rifle, not an Uzi. That is not to say some don't have uzis, I would not know.