Memang pemerintah Singapur memerintah dengan tangan besi, dan banyak pegawai2
pemerintahan di Singapur tidak terlalu ramah.
Saya ingat peraturan yang dikeluarkan pem. Singapur yang mendenda, lupa
berapa, orang2 yang ketahuan makan permen karet.
Yang paling harus kita salahkan adalah teroris2 yang menyebabkan banyak
kemerdekaan2 kita2 menjadi berkurang, khususnya kenyamanan melakukan perjalanan.
Sesudah Richard Reid ketahuan mencoba membom pesawat dengan bom di sepatu,
maka semua penumpang harus mencopot sepatu, termasuk oma2 dan anak2 sekalipun.
Tadinya ada yang ngedumel mengapa oma2 dan anak2 juga harus copot sepatu juga.
Dan saya rasa pem. Amrik mengadakan peraturan ini supaya tidak bisa dituduh
bahwa mereka diskriminasi. Saya rasa tidak ada yang menyangka bahwa ada teroris
yang tega mengorbankan anak2. (Kalau teroris mengorbankan tunangannya sih
sudah terjadi. Kalau nggak salah ingat seorang wanita Inggris, tidak tahu
bahwa titipan pacarnya yang orang Arab berisi bom, dan diapun mati waktu bom
tsb. meledak di udara. Mungkin wanita Inggris itu menurut pacarnya layak saja
mati, sebab dia seorang kafir).
Tidak ada yang menyangka bahwa teroris pun akan menggunakan anaknya, seperti
yang (untung saja) sempat ditangkap oleh pem. Inggris sebelum teroris tsb.
meledakkan pesawat dengan membawa anaknya dan menyembunyikan bom tsb. di botol
susu anak bayinya.
Kita ingat bahwa pada saat itu, tidak ada cairan satupun yang boleh dibawa
masuk ke pesawat, tidak boleh dibawa masuk liwat tempat sekuriti. Semua harus
masuk di bagasi. Beberapa airport sampai tutup, dan tentunya ini berdampak
yang sangat negatif terhadap perekonomian. (Ada salah satu artikel yang saya
baca, dimana seorang mahasiswa yang mengantarkan kawannya ke airport pada waktu
itu, sempat mengambil barang2 yang terpaksa harus dibuang oleh penumpang).
Untung peraturan sekarang sudah dilonggarkan. Penumpang boleh membawa
cairan, asalkan di botol yang tidak lebih dari 3 oz. dan hanya sebanyak apa
yang bisa dimasukkan di ziploc bag (kantong plastic kecil) ukuran 1/4 galon.
Baru2 ini terbukti lagi adanya teroris Islam yang mengorbankan anak2, seperti
yang terjadi beberapa minggu yang lalu di Baghdad. 2 pria diijinkan liwat oleh
tentara yang menjaga check point karena tentara tsb. melihat ada 2 anak2 yang
duduk di bangku belakang mobil tsb. Sesudah liwat check point tsb. , mobil di
parkir, ke 2 teroris Islam tsb. lari keluar, dan mobil pun diledakkan bersama
ke dua anak2 tsb. didalam mobil.
Untuk dikebirinya kebebasan dan kenyamanan melakukan perjalanan tsb. kita
semua bisa berterima kasih kepada teroris Islam yang mengglobal sekarang2 ini.
Saya masih ingat waktu dimana kalau melakukan perjalanan di Amrik, pengantar
boleh mengantar sampai ke pintu tempat penumpang boarding menuju belalai.
Those were the days my friend .........
Yap Hong Gie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/tionghoa-net/message/54166
Dangerous Four-Letter word: Do not utter the word BOMB in the
airport at checkpoint..
Do not use the word " BOMB " even for private conversation in airport
although the law only applies to saying it in public in particularly
to security officers.
A FAMILY HOLIDAY RUINED BY ILLOGICAL SECURITY OFFICERS
Dear Mr. Foo,
My name is Sandra Tan (I/C number 7328669G). It is with great
disappointment and distress that I am filing a complaint to you with
regards to my situation.
My family (including myself, my husband, my daughter, and my son)
planned a Darwin holiday for the March school vacation period and
was supposed to depart on 09 March. Unfortunately, we were put in a
situation by the security officers at the departure terminal, that
was way beyond our control and we were not able to make our trip.
The following is an account of what had happened : -
I entered the Immigration gantry at about 7.15pm with my daughter
(Belle Lee, 13 yrs old) to have our passport scanned and our hand
carry luggage checked whilst my husband (Lee Ming Chong) stayed
behind with my son (Caius Lee, 8 yrs old) at the ticketing counter
to sort out my son's visa.
After having mine and my Belle's passport scanned, we proceed to the
security gantry to have our hand luggage and our bodies scanned.
Belle passed the security gantry first, whilst I followed right
behind her. A lady officer asked me to remove my boots for scanning,
and I did as told immediately and put my boots inside the basket
provided, for it to be scanned together with my hand luggage.
I then proceed to the metal detector of which I cleared without the
gantry beeping or detecting any metal objects. I was then asked to
collect my luggage and my boots. In the mean time, Belle was throwing
away a sweet wrapper and retuning to me and saw me putting on my
boots.
Belle then asked casually "Mummy, why do you have to remove your
shoes?"
Whilst putting on my boots, I replied her and said that "they (the
security officers) are afraid that we might keep bombs in our shoes
(which is why I need to take it off to have it scanned)"
Immediately, a security officer standing at the conveyor belt
(Stephen S Naidira) who was standing in front of me said with a very
rude tone "repeat what you just said". I clarified with him what he
meant - is it for me to repeat what I had told my daughter? He said
loudly again, to repeat what I had just said. So I did exactly what
he told me. I said to him that "my daughter asked me why I need to
take off my shoes, and I told her that you guys (the security
officers) are afraid that we will keep bombs in our shoes."
He immediately asked me to stand aside and said that he had to
report it to his superior that I said the word "bomb" twice. Then an
Indian lady (Sivamalar) at the customs started hurling at me and my
daughter and said that I said the word "bomb" twice and it is
against the law and I can be sent to jail and they are calling the
police.
She (Sivamalar) was so loud and rude and she shoved us to the side,
and refused to listen to my explanation. In fact, she got so
aggressive that another officer Ricky Lim (I guess it's her
supervisor) had to come forward to stop her from further
attacking me and my daughter verbally, and specifically asked
Sivamalar to "shut up". I told Ricky Lim that I would like to know
the names of his staff because their attitude and rudeness were
simply beyond any acceptable level.
Immediately Sivamalar got so angry and aggressive that she started
charging at Ricky Lim and hurled "What?! What?! What?! She (she
meant me) said the word "Bomb" twice, so what is wrong with
arresting her (which is me) and we were told that if we heard the
word twice, we will arrest!!"
At that time, Stephen S Naidira came to me again to intimidate me
further by asking me to repeat what I said earlier to my daughter
again. I refused to repeat again then because I believe he was
deliberately asking me to repeat so that he can count the number of
times that I mentioned the word "bomb".
I also believe that that the officers were deliberately provoking me
by being rude and intimidating, in the hope that I will retaliate in
kind, thereby making their unreasonable actions justifiable.
Despite my anger and the fact that my daughter was scared to tears
by the situation, I knew I had to keep my cool. I sat aside with my
daughter taking down names of the personnel involved on my mobile
phone. I was told to wait for another officer of a higher rank to
decide on the matter, and I was still hoping whoever the higher
ranked officer that was coming will have the logical thinking to
acknowledge that what I had said to my daughter was a simple,
harmless private conversation taken completely out-of-context.
At about 7.30pm, the Sergeant-in-charge, Amran Buang came. After I
explained the full context of the incident to him, he refused to
make a decision and decided to escalate it further to the Auxilary
Police and State Police. He said that the word "bomb" is very
sensitive and I should not have mentioned it twice.
I explained to him that I did not know saying the word "bomb" is
against the law, and I further explained that I did not say the
word "bomb" in a threatening context to the officer, the word
"bomb" was taken completely out of context as part of an answer to
my daughter's question.
Despite my explanation, he said he cannot make the decision and my
case has to be escalated to higher authorities.
Meanwhile, at about 7.40pm, my son's visa cleared and my husband and
my son came in through the customs. After knowing what had happened,
my husband tried to talk to Sergeant Amran Buang, further explaining
to him that we are just a family going on holiday and what I have
said to my daughter had been taken out of context. Again, no one was
bothered to listen.
And again, we were told to wait for another officer with an even
higher ranking. With time ticking away and at 7.55pm with no sign of
the higher authorities appearing, we knew then our hope of boarding
our flight had diminished.
Whilst waiting, Stephen S Naidira (the security officer) gathered
with a few security officers at the side, including Sivamalar to
discuss how they should present their statement to the police when
they arrive later to make sure that they are adequately covered, and
that they are just following the rule and doing what they were told
to do. They said by insisting that they are taking actions "by-the-
book", they would be ok.
I hope by now you have a clear picture of the situation. My kids
were both crying then, with more and more policemen arriving which
scared the living daylights of them, and with no hope to continue
our holiday plans.
I believe every action inside the terminal is recorded and I would
insist that your review the CCTV recordings on that night to know
that I am only stating the truth without exaggeration. You can also
see that during the entire episode, I was not at any point defiant
or rude or refused any further check by the officers, despite the
infuriating situation that me and my family were put through.
I know it is important to stay vigilant to protect Singapore. I have
young children, I know how important it is, which is why I complied
without complaining when I had to remove my boots for scanning.
However, here is an obvious case of the security officers trying to
get away with their rudeness and aggressiveness by taking things way
beyond what was necessary, in the name of following the security
protocol.
They were really angry when I asked for their names from Mr. Ricky
Lim, and they knew very well then that they can abuse their power to
make things very difficult for me and my family.
At around 8.05pm, we were informed by the Tiger Airways personnel
that the plane will have to depart and they will off-load our
luggage from the plane. At around 8.10 p.m., the State Police and
other policemen arrived to take our statement.
In the entire episode, the State Police and the SWISS PORT personnel
were the only ones who conducted themselves professionally and
offered us consolation and meaningful advice. They have also at some
stages expressed their personal views that they acknowledged this
incident was gravely mis-handled on the part of the security
officers.
The State Police further confirmed that there is no case against us,
and they would just need to complete the paperwork.
The Budget Terminal manager came to meet me and said that whilst he
empathized with our situation, it is an airport security protocol
and frankly, it's "just too bad" that this happened to us.
My statement and my daughter's statement only completed at about
10.45p.m. The counter service staff, Ms Nur Aisah Bte Ali Hassan was
very helpful and advised us on our next steps. She was kind enough
to ask us to return the next day to change the traveling dates and
advised the additional charges involved.
I am not given a report for this case, but my case number with the
State Police is P/20070309/0015. I was already told by the State
Police that the case is closed without further action.
For the ordeal that my family had been put through, I would want an
official reply from CAAS and all relevant authorities addressing the
following :
-Whether the security officers were trained to handle passengers
with such bad attitude and rudeness and if such actions by them are
condoned by authorities. I would insist you to refer to the CCTV
recordings during the period of the incident.
What actions would be taken by CAAS and all relevant authorities
with reference to both the security officers, Mr. Stephen S Naidira
ad Ms. Sivamalar, for their unruly behavior and attitude? Surely,
characters as such do not belong to a national airport that aspired
to be a world class traveling hub.
What actions would be taken by CAAS and all relevant authorities with
reference to Sergeant Amran Buang, who had the authority to end this
episode promptly, but instead decided to prolong our ordeal for no
justifiable cause?
Is it a protocol that even after establishing the facts that we, as
a family poses no security threat, there is still a need to escalate
the matter to the authority and have the State Police and other
policemen carry out a full investigations only to end up in vain?
Why is it that even at level of Sergeant, whom I reckon is better
educated, experienced, and able to make logical sense of the whole
situation, refuse to make a simple decision and end our ordeal
quickly? Is this a Singapore civil service practice where decision
making is pushed and shoved from one level to another no matter how
obvious what the final decision should be from the very beginning?
Whether all the officers concern are properly trained and competent
to handle such situation. Besides hardware ( i.e. the protocol
book), are they taught to apply the software (i.e . common senses)?
Is it really a protocol that as long as the word "bomb" is mentioned
twice by a person (once being asked to repeat by the officer) ??then
no matter what context, tone, situation and profile of the person
who said it, it would not be taken into consideration?
What if my daughter instead of asking me a simple question about my
shoes, decided to say: "mummy, according to news report, there are
speculations that the recent Indonesian air crash may be attributed
to a bomb inside the plane." Would your security officer would come
up to her and ask her to repeat one more time, and she would be put
under arrest?
Your staff kept telling me that saying the word "bomb" in the
airport is illegal and I can go to jail. They quoted newspaper
examples of how people have gone to jail because of that.
I think your staffs need to be trained to understand and
differentiate situations and circumstances. As far as I knew, the
people that went to jail had VERBALLY THREATENED staff members in
the aviation service or had DELIBERATELY caused public alarm using
sensitive words.
My case was clearly none of the above. Even if, I am saying if,
indeed its illegal to mention the word "bomb" in the airport no
matter what context, the person involved need to be warned ahead of
time. You cannot arrest a person for committing something illegal
when the person has no idea that the word is illegal in the first
place.
Your staff could have given me a verbal warning to say that such
sensitive words should be refrained in the airport and I would have
walk away remembering the warning. But instead, they decide to let
the matter escalate further.
Who is to compensate for the expenses that are already incurred and
forfeited for this trip, and our emotional stress and duress during
the entire episode?
The total cost incurred, including air tickets, accommodation, and
land tours amount to about $4,200. We had to put up with
hours of humiliation with more than twenty policemen and officials
surrounding us, questioning us, checking our luggage through and
through.
We had put up with never-ending questioning from different
departments, and best of all, repeated checks on my same pair of
boots. My kids were terrified, puzzled, disappointed and exhausted
from this entire ordeal.
My husband and I are left with one week of applied leave and no
vacation and holiday to look forward to.
I would like to state that not everyone that we came across in this
episode had been unpleasant. I wish to take this opportunity to
express my gratitude for the empathy shown by the State Police and
the SWISS PORT personnel.
I will be waiting for your reply. Please let me know when to expect
it in email. In the mean time, I may seek legal advice for my rights
and entitlement in this incident.
Yours sincerely
Sandra Tan Hong Lian
I/C : S7328669G
Blk 148, Tampines Ave. 5
#04-284, Singapore 521148
Mobile : 81236990
