Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Airport Worker Abused Body Scanner  
User currently offlineRebelDJ From United Kingdom, joined May 2007, 114 posts, RR: 0
Posted (4 years 9 months 3 hours ago) and read 13683 times:

It hasn't taken long!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/london/8584484.stm

48 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinethegreatRDU From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 2311 posts, RR: 4
Reply 1, posted (4 years 9 months ago) and read 13230 times:

Pathetic..more instances will come...
Using these things are not even feasable...in their current form, they can never be the primary screening method..they take up too much space and take too long...where do we draw the line here....



Our Returning Champion
User currently offlinecontrails From United States of America, joined Oct 2000, 1834 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (4 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 12999 times:

Quoting thegreatRDU (Reply 1):
Using these things are not even feasable...in their current form, they can never be the primary screening method..they take up too much space and take too long...where do we draw the line here....

I, and a lot of other people, agree with you. Maybe the new head of TSA will change things.

And then again, maybe not.



Flying Colors Forever!
User currently offlinethegreatRDU From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 2311 posts, RR: 4
Reply 3, posted (4 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 12681 times:

Quoting contrails (Reply 2):
I, and a lot of other people, agree with you. Maybe the new head of TSA will change things.

And then again, maybe not.

And let's throw in the fact that their ridiculously expensive....



Our Returning Champion
User currently offlineMoltenRock From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (4 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 12569 times:

The abuses will mount one on top of the other as more and more of these worthless invasion of privacy machines are installed.

User currently offlineRebelDJ From United Kingdom, joined May 2007, 114 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (4 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 12474 times:

Quoting thegreatRDU (Reply 1):
where do we draw the line here....

I guess we will each draw our own line. As the obstacles to travel get bigger and more numerous, we will each decide when our own threshold has been reached, depending on our individual tolerance.
For instance, I choose a ground based alternative in Europe if it takes around 3 hours, I also choose not to take an internal flight in the US after a transatlantic crossing if I can drive from the gateway to the final destination in around 4 hours.


User currently offlinelightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 13520 posts, RR: 100
Reply 6, posted (4 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 12210 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

First, this is a trivial breech. I feel for both the woman who entered the scanner and the '25 year old worker.'

Quoting MoltenRock (Reply 4):
The abuses will mount one on top of the other as more and more of these worthless invasion of privacy machines are installed.

The abuses will grow quickly. It is going to kill what remains of first class travel. What female celebrity will want to risk having their image posted on the net? I doubt they will be able to lock down these machines 'tight enough' to prevent that from happening. Even if it is just a 'camera phone' snapshot of the body scan, the photos will get out.

It will be a boon to the chartered jet business.

Quoting RebelDJ (Reply 5):
I guess we will each draw our own line. As the obstacles to travel get bigger and more numerous, we will each decide when our own threshold has been reached, depending on our individual tolerance.

Judging on how there has been zero air travel growth from what the USA had pre-9/11, it implies quite a few people have reached that threshold. The tele-meeting companies must know the body scanners will boost their business.



Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlineikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21580 posts, RR: 59
Reply 7, posted (4 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 12092 times:

Quoting RebelDJ (Reply 5):
I guess we will each draw our own line. As the obstacles to travel get bigger and more numerous, we will each decide when our own threshold has been reached, depending on our individual tolerance.

This is the goal of governments bent on controlling their people and limiting freedom. Limited freedom of travel is a big part of that. Now, are they outright admitting to trying to make travel difficult? No.

But all these measures add up. Flying is now more difficult, and by requiring advanced forms of ID, the governments can easily track where you are at all times. They can also put up random obstacles to travel with that system by "flagging" your ID, making it difficult or impossible for "undesirables" to travel by air at all, to leave the country, etc.

Add to that the push for security of the same type on trains by many in government in the EU and USA, and the push for electric cars with limited range, "phone home" computers in autos that track mileage and speed desired by many lawmakers in the Western USA, and these are simply other forms of controlling and tracking movement of citizenry, a direct affront on liberty and freedom.

How do you impose these restrictions easily? By making people believe it is for their safety or for the good of the planet.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8646 posts, RR: 10
Reply 8, posted (4 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 12031 times:

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 6):
I doubt they will be able to lock down these machines 'tight enough' to prevent that from happening.

Why? If my employer can lock up my laptop to the point where I can't get any work files from it why not the machines? You need a something to be able to write the images to. Lock that and the images will never get out unless someone walks way with the computer itself in which case we have bigger problems to deal with  


User currently offlinethegreatRDU From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 2311 posts, RR: 4
Reply 9, posted (4 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 11960 times:

I mean this is just a great big waste......another example of the fleecing of America....

Quoting ikramerica (Reply 7):
How do you impose these restrictions easily? By making people believe it is for their safety or for the good of the planet.

Looking at it that way I have to agree....



Our Returning Champion
User currently offlinebe77 From Canada, joined Nov 2007, 455 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (4 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 11950 times:

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 6):
Even if it is just a 'camera phone' snapshot of the body scan, the photos will get out.
Quoting airbazar (Reply 8):
If my employer can lock up my laptop to the point where I can't get any work files from it why not the machines?

Classic problem - if you don't trust your employees, then even allowing them to see something on the screen is going to permit a breach - with any decent digital camera (phone or otherwise), you can copy a lot of information in a very, very short time.



Tower, Affirmitive, gear is down and welded
User currently offlinetharanga From United States of America, joined Apr 2009, 1867 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (4 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 11755 times:

In theory, phones are not allowed into the room where the images are viewed.

We shall see.

This incident here is something of an oddball case.


User currently offlineGDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 13252 posts, RR: 77
Reply 12, posted (4 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 11701 times:

What irks is that the rapid installation of these machines was a response to that attempt by Spongebob Flamepants on Christmas Day.
But that was a failure of intel, and/or inter agency communication, not in security, since his half baked (literally) device was so constrained by existing security that it was barely viable and tests seems to show, since the event, that it would not have holed the fuselage.


User currently offlinelightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 13520 posts, RR: 100
Reply 13, posted (4 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 11598 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting be77 (Reply 10):
Classic problem - if you don't trust your employees, then even allowing them to see something on the screen is going to permit a breach - with any decent digital camera (phone or otherwise), you can copy a lot of information in a very, very short time.

   No need to 'walk away with the machine.' It is not trusting employees. It is the statistics of 'bad apples' amoung the horde of people who will have access to these images. We're talking about having *perfect background checks* on thousands of people if these machines become as common as the TSA proposes.

Any predictions on how much this hurts air travel yeild? Frequent flyer miles would be worth a lot less the second images hit Opra... Let us not fool ourselves. This issue will be decided by the talk shows, not a.net.

Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlinem11stephen From United States of America, joined Aug 2008, 1247 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (4 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 8453 times:

Quoting thegreatRDU (Reply 9):
I mean this is just a great big waste......another example of the fleecing of America....

Quoting ikramerica (Reply 7):
How do you impose these restrictions easily? By making people believe it is for their safety or for the good of the planet.

Looking at it that way I have to agree....

Armchair TSA heads-what is your security solution?

Quoting MoltenRock (Reply 4):
The abuses will mount one on top of the other as more and more of these worthless invasion of privacy machines are installed.

I hardly call these worthless. Security has improved so much since 9/11 that the Christmas Day "attempted" bombing was the "best" Alqaeda could do. The bomb was already unreliable even in laboratory testing and had the bomb gone off it wouldn't have brought down the plane either. We can thank TSA and other aviation security organizations for that.

Some of you seem to think that Americans should just be ok with terrorism and be ok with planes being blown up periodically.

Yes, the TSA has issues that need to be worked out. Yes, the Department of Homeland Security had failures in regards to the 12/25 bombing. However, we are MUCH safer thanks to the TSA.



My opinions, statements, etc. are my own and do not have any association with those of any employer.
User currently offlinethegreatRDU From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 2311 posts, RR: 4
Reply 15, posted (4 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 8352 times:

Quoting m11stephen (Reply 14):
Armchair TSA heads-what is your security solution?

Well stephen, we have to stop the knee jerks......
The underwear bomber did not board on the US side...but it was still preventable but the bureaucracies could not coordinate their watch lists...
The 9/11 hijackers set off the metal detectors but were allowed to board with pocket knives...because they were not banned from the government on-board flights at the time..
The FAM program is a complete waste...and has to be died down to high security routes..eg the Middle East, Washington, Important Events
These full body scanners are invasive, cumbersome, costly, are lawsuits waiting to happen, and inefficient

[Edited 2010-03-24 17:57:14]


Our Returning Champion
User currently offlineWarRI1 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 9290 posts, RR: 12
Reply 16, posted (4 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 8146 times:

[quote=m11stephen,reply=14]Some of you seem to think that Americans should just be ok with terrorism and be ok with planes being blown up periodically.

Yes, the TSA has issues that need to be worked out. Yes, the Department of Homeland Security had failures in regards to the 12/25 bombing. However, we are MUCH safer thanks to the TSA.

I certainly agree with your points.
  



It is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.
User currently offline757luver From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 143 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (4 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 8007 times:

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 6):
The tele-meeting companies must know the body scanners will boost their business.

Plus they probably own the companies that sell and install the machines. Kind of like the companies that come out with new items that keep up with the age range of the baby boomers.

Quoting GDB (Reply 12):
Spongebob Flamepants

Thanks, I really needed that laugh after the day I had today!!!!



Long live the 757!
User currently offlinetharanga From United States of America, joined Apr 2009, 1867 posts, RR: 1
Reply 18, posted (4 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 8007 times:

Quoting thegreatRDU (Reply 15):
The 9/11 hijackers set off the metal detectors but were allowed to board with pocket knives...because they were not banned from the government on-board flights at the time..

Actually, most of the 9/11 plotters were even selected for extra security, when they checked in. The extra security was just irrelevant to their plot; it was related to checked luggage. Security was trying to prevent another PA 103 I think. Security is always looking backwards at the last attempted attack, and not forwards.

Quoting contrails (Reply 2):
Maybe the new head of TSA will change things.

New guy seems to be interested in behavior profiling, which I think is good, if the agents are adequately trained. If not well trained, it'll just annoy everybody for no reason.


User currently offlinec5load From United States of America, joined Sep 2008, 917 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (4 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 7985 times:

Quoting contrails (Reply 2):
Maybe the new head of TSA will change things.

      Thank you, I've been looking for a laugh today!  



"But this airplane has 4 engines, it's an entirely different kind of flying! Altogether"
User currently offlinethegreatRDU From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 2311 posts, RR: 4
Reply 20, posted (4 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 7962 times:

Quoting tharanga (Reply 18):
Actually, most of the 9/11 plotters were even selected for extra security, when they checked in. The extra security was just irrelevant to their plot; it was related to checked luggage. Security was trying to prevent another PA 103 I think. Security is always looking backwards at the last attempted attack, and not forwards.

Yep they set off the alarms had a secondary screening they discovered pocket knives but they weren't a big deal back then...



Our Returning Champion
User currently offlinem11stephen From United States of America, joined Aug 2008, 1247 posts, RR: 1
Reply 21, posted (4 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 7408 times:

Quoting thegreatRDU (Reply 15):
The FAM program is a complete waste...and has to be died down to high security routes..eg the Middle East, Washington, Important Events

I personally don't think relying on passengers to stop an attack is a reliable security plan. FAMs are already assigned to flights with a high security risk. I think F/As need to be better trained to handle terrorists as I recently discussed in another thread but getting rid of air marshals is a huge mistake.

The airlines really have no idea how a passenger would react in a terrorist attack. For all they know the passengers could freeze up and do nothing. Saying, "Passengers will stop the attack" is ignorant. Its great if passengers react but, in reality, no one knows how "the average joe" is going to react until faced with that situation. FAMs are highly trained, help to the highest federal standards in regards to training and shooting ability.

I use to think FAMs were an utter waste but then I took a reality check, imagined myself in a terrorist situation, and realized how important FAMs are. Also, they are on a lot more then 5% of flights as CNN claims.

Passengers can not be counted on to stop an attack, F/As still lack anywhere close to adequate counter-terrorism training, therefore we need FAMs. Yes, the flight deck is secure but there are still many other ways terrorists could attack an airliner. All possible "lines" of security need to be implemented ad strengthened. FAMs are one of those lines. As I stated before, I still think it is extremely important for F/As to receive much improved counter-terrorism training. I doubt we will ever see a good enough counter-terrorist program for F/As implemented, sadly.

Quoting thegreatRDU (Reply 15):
These full body scanners are invasive, cumbersome, costly, are lawsuits waiting to happen, and inefficient

These new body scanners basically guarantee that its going to be impossible for any prohibited items to be brought on board an aircraft again. As shown by 12/25, airport security has made it harder and harder for terrorists. Yes, it can get better but its not an utter waste as some would have you believe.

Quoting thegreatRDU (Reply 15):
Well stephen, we have to stop the knee jerks......
The underwear bomber did not board on the US side...but it was still preventable but the bureaucracies could not coordinate their watch lists...
The 9/11 hijackers set off the metal detectors but were allowed to board with pocket knives...because they were not banned from the government on-board flights at the time..

Security before and on 9/11 sucked. I'm not going to disagree with that. What idiot thought that it would be a good idea to allow passengers to bring box cutters onto airliners?

Quoting tharanga (Reply 18):
Actually, most of the 9/11 plotters were even selected for extra security, when they checked in. The extra security was just irrelevant to their plot; it was related to checked luggage. Security was trying to prevent another PA 103 I think. Security is always looking backwards at the last attempted attack, and not forwards.

No one was really prepared to handle a suicide hijacking. Flight attendants, pilots, air traffic controllers, etc. were all trained to handle a "typical" hijacking which involved holding the passengers hostage. The most effective thing to do was sit down, shut up, and do whatever the hijackers said. There were warnings that a suicide hijacking could happen however these threats were not taken seriously.



My opinions, statements, etc. are my own and do not have any association with those of any employer.
User currently offlinethegreatRDU From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 2311 posts, RR: 4
Reply 22, posted (4 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 7243 times:

Quoting m11stephen (Reply 21):
No one was really prepared to handle a suicide hijacking. Flight attendants, pilots, air traffic controllers, etc. were all trained to handle a "typical" hijacking which involved holding the passengers hostage. The most effective thing to do was sit down, shut up, and do whatever the hijackers said. There were warnings that a suicide hijacking could happen however these threats were not taken seriously.

Shanksville, PA? Imagine if the other guys on the other flights did not have weapoons...

FAMs are highly trained, help to the highest federal standards in regards to training and shooting ability.

I use to think FAMs were an utter waste but then I took a reality check, imagined myself in a terrorist situation, and realized how important FAMs are. Also, they are on a lot more then 5% of flights as CNN claims.

Passengers can not be counted on to stop an attack, F/As still lack anywhere close to adequate counter-terrorism training, therefore we need FAMs. Yes, the flight deck is secure but there are still many other ways terrorists could attack an airliner. All possible "lines" of security need to be implemented ad strengthened. FAMs are one of those lines. As I stated before, I still think it is extremely important for F/As to receive much improved counter-terrorism training. I doubt we will ever see a good enough counter-terrorist program for F/As implemented, sadly.
Quoting m11stephen (Reply 21):

But at what cost Stephen...at what cost...
Do you need me to post some links of rouge FAMs...were talking weapons and drug runners...
Since 9/11 the program has drained millions.....had a higher turnover rate..been plagued by scandals...since 9/11, 4 persons have been arrested and a mentally unstable man was gunned down by FAMs...

Quoting m11stephen (Reply 21):
These new body scanners basically guarantee that its going to be impossible for any prohibited items to be brought on board an aircraft again. As shown by 12/25, airport security has made it harder and harder for terrorists. Yes, it can get better but its not an utter waste as some would have you believe.

Here your just implying the terrorist is always trying to get past the metal detector when infact there are so many ways...

[Edited 2010-03-24 19:26:01]


Our Returning Champion
User currently offlinewn700driver From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (4 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 7164 times:

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 13):
We're talking about having *perfect background checks* on thousands of people if these machines become as common as the TSA proposes.

Go ahead. Won't stop anything. I had a sister who was beaten to within in an inch of her life by a "good christian" type with a clean background (well, no longer...). I can see that individuals with problematic tendencies might get screened out, but in the end, nothing can stop someone with a clean background and an axe to grind. . .

Quoting tharanga (Reply 18):
Actually, most of the 9/11 plotters were even selected for extra security, when they checked in. The extra security was just irrelevant to their plot; it was related to checked luggage. Security was trying to prevent another PA 103 I think. Security is always looking backwards at the last attempted attack, and not forwards.

Yup. My biggest beef with the whole Security Theater fad is just who useless it all really is. Unless predicting the past is the only defining criterion of success. I'm glad, for the record, that it is harder to hijack a plane now. But that doesn't mean folks won't come up with other methods to hork up the system.

Quoting m11stephen (Reply 21):
personally don't think relying on passengers to stop an attack is a reliable security plan. FAMs are already assigned to flights with a high security risk. I think F/As need to be better trained to handle terrorists as I recently discussed in another thread but getting rid of air marshals is a huge mistake.

Also agree. How much do these rediculous harassment machines cost? What would it take (form a cost perspective) to get FAMs back on board? I guarantee if we can flush a trillion down the toilet without thought of the future this week, then we can find a few hundred million to make this happen. It is the only way to be sure any flight is safe from this sort of thing anyway. I mean, seriously, what are they going to say the first time one of these "miracle" scanners lets something through the cracks anyway?


User currently offlineAirFrance744 From United States of America, joined Aug 2009, 81 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (4 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 6927 times:

I can't believe that he did that, but the reality is that there are sick people out there in the world.


Flown over 115,000 miles and I'm only 19!
25 m11stephen : The mentally unstable man announced that he had a bomb while simultaneously reaching for something in his backpack. The FAMs followed their training
26 wn700driver : Sorry, I knew that. What I meant, was back in significant numbers I know there were a bunch more right after 9/11 than there are now, for example. I
27 thegreatRDU : Cargo, hopping the fence, rouge insiders..like FAMs, airline, and airport personnel Right.....they fought back when were being hijacked... How well v
28 m11stephen : Maybe we should just stop air travel... FAMs and airline personnel undergo extensive background checks. Cargo is also screened and passed through bom
29 cschleic : It's in the airlines' interests to be the ones to start pushing back on this type of thing. They have the most to lose. Vote with your feet and wallet
30 A346Dude : Well said. Most people look at airport security, see the numerous holes and needless inconveniences, and think the people in charge of it all must be
31 UAL747DEN : Are you guys serious, a machine that shows a naked outline of your body really is that big of a deal to you? Rather than spending all that time in the
32 CX flyboy : How about shooting photos or video of the screen using an everyday digital camera or even camera phone? It doesn't matter whether the machine can rec
33 RebelDJ : Absolutely not - I couldn't care less about who sees my image, but there will be some people who do. They will say that this is a step too far, and a
34 tharanga : This is simply untrue. The body scanner doesn't scan your carry-on bag. The current fascination (I don't know the next one) is with plastic explosive
35 m11stephen : Its also important to analyze whats happening. The case I think you are thinking of involved a mentally ill man boarding a Canjet plane with a gun. S
36 Post contains links tharanga : Actually, I was thinking of this. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkish_Airlines_Flight_1476 Guy got in somehow when the flight deck door was open. No
37 Post contains images airbazar : Have you ever worked for a government military contractor? Not internet access, no cell phones allowed, no way to get files out of the computer, etc.
38 fca767 : What! The Fences at UK airports have holes big enough to pass a bottle of anything through. What's to stop someone on the inside of the fence driving
39 m11stephen : I had never heard of that hijacking! The normal procedure in the US is for an F/A to place a cart in the aisle and stand behind the cart while the fl
40 MSYPI7185 : Well things are a little better, INSPITE of the TSA. Many of the things that are done are for show IMO. It is perception over reality. There are too
41 thegreatRDU : At GSO it's too easy also...or what about observation decks? The list goes on and on.....
42 lightsaber : First, what are the provisions with these scanners and children and pregnant women? Quite bluntly, these scanners emit x-rays and I wouldn't want a fe
43 JoeCanuck : People blithely expose themselves on beaches and in locker rooms every day. Has there been a rash of photos of these people hitting the internet? Ther
44 floridaflyboy : While somewhat common, it is hardly "normal procedure." At many airlines that is not done. In fact, at my airline, we are very strictly prohibited fr
45 tharanga : however each airline does it, the Turkish hijacking should be case-study in what can happen if you aren't on the ball, every time the door is opened.
46 Post contains links keesje : Missuse will be hard to contain I think. You can't control one's mind. http://www.sexandjokes.com/pictures/airport-body-scanner.jpg
47 Post contains images Flighty : How about if we let Catholic priests handle this? We can trust them, because they are in the Church.
48 m11stephen : I hope you have some other means of protecting the flight deck then when the door is open. The average F/A couldn't stop a team of hijackers from cha
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
TXL, DUS Facing Anti Full-Body-Scanner Flashmob posted Sat Jan 9 2010 08:33:46 by Tobias2702
Time To Buy Stock In 3D Body Scanner Companies posted Thu Dec 31 2009 07:46:26 by I380North
Schiphol To Use Full Body Scanner On Flights To US posted Wed Dec 30 2009 11:30:01 by Evan767
Schiphol To Use Full Body Scanner On Flights To US posted Wed Dec 30 2009 08:48:29 by DariusBieber
Body Scanner In Test posted Thu Oct 15 2009 08:37:20 by Trystero
Airport Worker Dies At NCL posted Fri Jan 9 2009 10:19:41 by Sunshine79
Airport Worker Crushed To Death At AKL posted Mon Apr 11 2005 12:52:41 by 777ER
Landing Lauda Jet Kills Airport Worker On Runway posted Tue Jul 23 2002 01:07:57 by Englandair
Women Refuse To Go Through Airport Body Scanners posted Thu Mar 4 2010 05:46:48 by oa260
LAX Airport/Airline Worker? Help Me Out! posted Mon Feb 18 2008 12:55:51 by Toddy333