Anti Iraq War protesters strike again

RadioRetro

An Omni Air DC-10 hit at Shannon.... even though all US troops are out of Iraq (apart from trainers)..

squonk

These people should be charged with attempted murder. I had the dubious pleasure of being dragged along to a benefit gig for this bunch a few years ago. Seeing the group who vandalised the last aircraft being brought on stage and feted as some kind of heroes was maddening. Frankly, they vandalised an aircraft and could have put lives at risk. You need to be a special kind of moron to think these people are in any way great. If they're rounded up, they should at least be made pay for the damage. That would teach them a lesson fairly quickly.

globemaster1986

Charge them with terrorist offences of some sort! Abhorrent behaviour!!!

Sterling Archer

Headline should read terrorists sabotage Aircraft in Attempted murder.....

drdeadlift

Why didn't the airport police prevent them from getting to the aircraft? Could they not up the security around the arrival of these flights?

All that aside the war in Iraq is beyond terrorism

Delta Kilo

A/C was sitting on the ground for what seems to be a couple of days and parked on an old taxi way. Incident happened overnight too.


I agree, attempted murder and being made pay for the cost of the inspection and repair of the aircraft would most certainly teach them a lesson.

globemaster1986

Delta Kilo wrote: »

A/C was sitting on the ground for what seems to be a couple of days and parked on an old taxi way. Incident happened overnight too.


I agree, attempted murder and being made pay for the cost of the inspection and repair of the aircraft would most certainly teach them a lesson.

How long you think it would take to pay it back with their dole money?!

roundymac

Once again airport security has been found wanting.How many times have these planes been damaged at Shannon, plus the idiot who robbed the garda jeep in Cork and then the airport jeep and nearly rammed an Aer Lingus plane which was boarding passangers at the time. Where were the duty airport policewhen this lastest incident happened? No prizes for the correct answer. ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ:cool:

BrianD

globemaster1986 wrote: »

Charge them with terrorist offences of some sort! Abhorrent behaviour!!!

Nonsense. To suggest "attempted murder" is ridiculous. It's nothing of the sort.

Firstly. the aircraft would be inspected before any attempt to fly it. the graffiti would be a bit of a giveaway.

And secondly, these protestors are clearly not the type who want to kill more people. That's why they are making obvious attacks to disable the "machinery of war" and not the soldiers who are being sent where their political masters send them.

Charge them with vandalism but lets not be conjuring up ridiculous scenarios of attempted murder etc.

globemaster1986

BrianD wrote: »

Nonsense. To suggest "attempted murder" is ridiculous. It's nothing of the sort.

Firstly. the aircraft would be inspected before any attempt to fly it. the graffiti would be a bit of a giveaway.

And secondly, these protestors are clearly not the type who want to kill more people. That's why they are making obvious attacks to disable the "machinery of war" and not the soldiers who are being sent where their political masters send them.

Charge them with vandalism but lets not be conjuring up ridiculous scenarios of attempted murder etc.

Wow charge them with "vandalism" so they will really learn their lesson! That's the kind of liberal nonsense that has those wasters thinking they can do this sort of thing and get away with it as they move from protest to protest all the while sponging off the taxpayer! The fact that a preflight would be done is not relevant. Astonishing naivety

A320

Hopefully these ''rent-a-crowd'' folk will be caught
if a pilot or engineer can face charges for involuntary manslaughter due to their line of work if a flight ever went down these krusties should definitely face serious charges,who knows what else they did until a very close inspection is performed,could be very simple to contaminate a fuel/hydraulic system etc etc

IngazZagni

BrianD wrote: »

Nonsense. To suggest "attempted murder" is ridiculous. It's nothing of the sort.

Firstly. the aircraft would be inspected before any attempt to fly it. the graffiti would be a bit of a giveaway.

And secondly, these protestors are clearly not the type who want to kill more people. That's why they are making obvious attacks to disable the "machinery of war" and not the soldiers who are being sent where their political masters send them.

Charge them with vandalism but lets not be conjuring up ridiculous scenarios of attempted murder etc.

What's nonsense is that comment. Oh they sprayed graffiti on the plane so that makes it okay! That they should only be charged with vandalism is exactly the reason these guys do what they do. There is not that fear of getting caught or if they are they will get off lightly.

Also you do know that Omni Air is a charter airline hired by the US military to transport the troops. Most operations for Omni Air is to transport regular passengers on holidays. This damage will go on Omni Air's books and possibly Shannon airport as well, not the US military.

"They are not the type to want more people killed". Well they certainly don't act like that. What they did was dangerous and idiotic. They are the sort of people that give the rest of their fellow anti-war protesters a very bad name and it would be in your interest too to criticize them, not defend them as you seem to be doing.

roundymac

Criminal damage is another one they could be charged with.

Manic Moran

Omni Air also fly the Irish Army around, they were used for the Chad jaunt.

I'm guessing that as they were based in Shannon, it was cheaper for them to provide a service from Baldonnel than any other carrier. But, if they must move to Leipzig like ATA...

NTM

An Udaras

There is currently two separate investigations underway one by the Airport Police stationed in Shannon and DAA Aviation Security Dept and the other by the Gardai. The unfortunate reality is that there is no civil airport in the world that is impenetrable to these individuals from targeting it.

Even with its own Police Service and the support of the local Gardai and at times the DF. People intent on causing criminal damage to property may succeed due to remoteness of some of Shannon Airports aircraft stand areas being away from the Main Terminal area. Even with targeted Airport Police patrols & use of surveillance equipment.

Hopefully this review will highlight areas where security can continue to be tightened and improved.

To answer an earlier question it is the responsibility of an airline operator to request an additional security presence at a particular aircraft if they have concerns it will be targeted or interfered with and this will be all at the airlines expense.

urajoke

BrianD wrote: »

Nonsense. To suggest "attempted murder" is ridiculous. It's nothing of the sort.

Firstly. the aircraft would be inspected before any attempt to fly it. the graffiti would be a bit of a giveaway.

And secondly, these protestors are clearly not the type who want to kill more people. That's why they are making obvious attacks to disable the "machinery of war" and not the soldiers who are being sent where their political masters send them.

Charge them with vandalism but lets not be conjuring up ridiculous scenarios of attempted murder etc.

Honest to God,are you for real.

and severed a hydraulics pipe.

there are Air Traffic Controllers locked up in prison for following the rule of international aviation law (in Italy) and you think a dip **** crusty who severs a very important hydraulic line should be charged with vandalism Vandalism are you for real.

By the way what Iraq war is this exactly ? There is no justification for this anyone who could come up with one should really stop smoking those ILLEGAL substances that are cultivated by terrorists to fund the murder of their own citizens or those grow in our country by people living outside the law.

Considering that these aircraft were aiding the removal of troops from Iraq you would think the crustys would be there waving flags at them NOT trying to stop them:rolleyes:

Manic Moran

To answer an earlier question it is the responsibility of an airline operator to request an additional security presence at a particular aircraft if they have concerns it will be targeted or interfered with and this will be all at the airlines expense

For something like an unusual movement (eg weapons, radioactive material, the Crown Jewels etc) that makes sense, but for a routine stationing of the aircraft, it would fall to the airport. If the airport can't secure an airplane which is sitting there minding its own business, as opposed to having some notable target about it, then that becomes a commercial decision and the airline may decide to simply up and leave.

An Udaras

Manic Moran wrote: »

For something like an unusual movement (e.g. weapons, radioactive material, the Crown Jewels etc) that makes sense, but for a routine stationing of the aircraft, it would fall to the airport. If the airport can't secure an airplane which is sitting there minding its own business, as opposed to having some notable target about it, then that becomes a commercial decision and the airline may decide to simply up and leave.

If any airline wishes to have extra 24 hour (round the clock) security in place for an aircraft to guarantee it is not interfered with, that is involved in the transportation of passengers or cargo that may have a treat against it may request and cover costs of said security.

The Airport Authority should do everything in its power or as statutorily obliged to provide an airport with as much in the way of infrastructure security as possible, even with that said no airport can guarantee a person intent on a criminal activity will not enter a restricted area all the time. That just impossible?

Hence why Airlines that require it pay for additional security as required per there individual needs.

Stovepipe

Hi there
Shannon airport security dropped the ball on this one and it's their third offense, so a shoe up the hole for them. There are security cameras in operation 24/7 and staff on hand 24/7, so there has to be an immediate review of security standards and procedures. People have been sacked for less.Persons who damaged the aircraft should be charged with criminal damage for vandalising the aircraft, especially tampering with a hydraulic system (which might allow the parking brake to fail and then allow the aircraft to roll freely) as well as be charged with unlawful trespass. I have no sympathy for anyone who damages an aircraft, which is a soft target and an act of cowardice. If someone wants to vandalise and daub graffitti to protest against the USA's involvement in foreign wars, go and attack the American Embassy and see how far you get.

regards
Stovepipe

An Udaras

Hi Stovey,

Have to agree with you on the above.. There is currently a review underway to improve security in the state airports. Hopefully this will see increased investment in the Airport Police & security systems and infrastructure in each :-)

AlekSmart

An Udaras wrote: »

Hi Stovey,

Have to agree with you on the above.. There is currently a review underway to improve security in the state airports. Hopefully this will see increased investment in the Airport Police & security systems and infrastructure in each :-)

+1 on Stovepipes take.

However when I see the term "review" I tend to cringe inwardly,particularly if it's an interdepartmental one,a sub-species of review much favoured in Irish Public Administrative circles.

An Udaras

Well... The DAA in Dublin have a statutory responsibility to make sure each of its airports meet national & international requirements as laid down by likes of the Goverment,IATA,ECAC,EU etc..in regard to a airports security.

So as stated before by the Minister (after the Cork Airport Garda jeep incident) it's upto airport authority to look after such a review and implement changes.

I'm sure there is some embarrassed faces down there and the DAA will be looking for answers.

Manic Moran

An Udaras wrote: »

If any airline wishes to have extra 24 hour (round the clock) security in place for an aircraft to guarantee it is not interfered with, that is involved in the transportation of passengers or cargo that may have a treat against it may request and cover costs of said security.

The Airport Authority should do everything in its power or as statutorily obliged to provide an airport with as much in the way of infrastructure security as possible, even with that said no airport can guarantee a person intent on a criminal activity will not enter a restricted area all the time. That just impossible?

Hence why Airlines that require it pay for additional security as required per there individual needs.

Not sure I'm getting my point across. You're focusing on Omni's activities. We're not talking about a threat to any specific aircraft or transit here, you're talking about a random group of people who happen to have a grudge against a specific airline. That same level of grudge and opportunity will apply to anyone who happens to harbour any ill will to any airline at all which happens to use Shannon. Today it's Omni, but who's to say that tomorrow the target wouldn't be an Iberian or SpanAir aircraft sitting awaiting its turn to go into the Shannon Aerospace hangar, with ETA members looking to place a bomb on a timer on the aircraft?

There is a certain fundamental level of security which is expected of an international airport, that includes that people of any sort can't just randomly walk up to parked commercial jets and set about them as they will. Is it really up to Omni Air to ensure everyday airport perimeter security?

NTM

An Udaras

Manic Moran wrote: »

Not sure I'm getting my point across. You're focusing on Omni's activities. We're not talking about a threat to any specific aircraft or transit here, you're talking about a random group of people who happen to have a grudge against a specific airline. That same level of grudge and opportunity will apply to anyone who happens to harbour any ill will to any airline at all which happens to use Shannon. Today it's Omni, but who's to say that tomorrow the target wouldn't be an Iberian or SpanAir aircraft sitting awaiting its turn to go into the Shannon Aerospace hangar, with ETA members looking to place a bomb on a timer on the aircraft?

There is a certain fundamental level of security which is expected of an international airport, that includes that people of any sort can't just randomly walk up to parked commercial jets and set about them as they will. Is it really up to Omni Air to ensure everyday airport perimeter security?

NTM

The threat in Shannon is leveled towards Air Carriers or Military A/C involved or suspected to be involved in the transport of troops/cargo to the Middle East AO.

No it's not upto Airline to ensure an airports security only it's own thats all I was saying.

The likes of ICAO Annex 17 and EU2320 and the Goverments own current NCASP set out requirements required by airport authorities. Even with this its still wont stop someone hoping or cutting a fence and entering?

Airports feature regular police patrols,CCTV,police dogs,security fences etc... But there is no such thing as 100% Security. Every Acre of an airport can not be covered 100% of the time.

Airports rely on robust security, staff and the general public being vigilant to counter threats like this and reporting them to the likes of the Airport Police or Gardai. It's the unfortunate reality & truth.

expectationlost

squonk wrote: »

These people should be charged with attempted murder. I had the dubious pleasure of being dragged along to a benefit gig for this bunch a few years ago. Seeing the group who vandalised the last aircraft being brought on stage and feted as some kind of heroes was maddening. Frankly, they vandalised an aircraft and could have put lives at risk. You need to be a special kind of moron to think these people are in any way great. If they're rounded up, they should at least be made pay for the damage. That would teach them a lesson fairly quickly.

why would they try to fly a plane that people standing beside getting arrested said they'd sabotaged? (as was in that case)

parsi

It's a little known fact that Shannon security had earlier confiscated a 101ml bottle of water from them...

Bad news for Shannon - they should be able to keep a secure perimeter at all times - this is bread & butter security : it's not as if they dug a tunnel from Ballycasey and surfaced on the runway.

BrianD

urajoke wrote: »

Honest to God,are you for real. there are Air Traffic Controllers locked up in prison for following the rule of international aviation law (in Italy) and you think a dip **** crusty who severs a very important hydraulic line should be charged with vandalism Vandalism are you for real.

By the way what Iraq war is this exactly ? There is no justification for this anyone who could come up with one should really stop smoking those ILLEGAL substances that are cultivated by terrorists to fund the murder of their own citizens or those grow in our country by people living outside the law.

Considering that these aircraft were aiding the removal of troops from Iraq you would think the crustys would be there waving flags at them NOT trying to stop them:rolleyes:

I am for real but one asks if you are for real with your attempted murder blah blah nonsense.

Vandalism is the worst that they could be. What else could it be? While somebody else pointed out it is the responsibility of the airport to secure the field but it is the responsibility of the aircrew to inspect the aircraft before flight. I'd imagine the protestors make their work obvious - it would be pointless otherwise.

I'm not sure what the rest of your post is about.

So far as I am aware the planes in question have been used for transiting troops to and from both Iraq and Afghanistan. I hear these protestors in between rolling joints keep a good track of tail numbers.