Australian Comedy Group Prods APEC Security

ajdlinux writes "Members of the Australian comedy group The Chaser were arrested today after attempting to breach security at the APEC Leaders Conference in Sydney. Chas Licciardello and Julian Morrow were arrested, along with nine crew members (all are now free on bail), just a short distance away from the InterContinental Hotel where President Bush is staying. They had already cleared at least two police checkpoints, according to CNN, disguised as a Canadian motorcade. 'No particular reason we chose Canada,' said Taylor. 'We just thought they'd be a country who the cops wouldn't scrutinize too closely, and who feasibly would only have three cars in their motorcade — as opposed to the 20 or so gas guzzlers that Bush has brought with him.'" CNN has a photo of Licciardello, dressed as Osama bin Laden, being arrested.

Previous pranks

[Organic User (1103717)]

The third series of the Chasers War on Everything started yesterday. Back in the first series they did a prank with Virgin Blue booking e-tickets under the names 'Terry Wrist' and 'Al Kyder' (you can watch the clip here [google.com]). This prank should be aired this Wednesday.

Tomorrow people living in Sydney will be getting a public holiday and the city will be complete lock down mode.

Re:Previous pranks

[sqldr (838964)]

Their finest moment has to be wheeling a trojan horse full of greek soldiers into the turkish embassy.. (can we park this here?)

Re:

[Organic User (1103717)]

Their finest moment has to be wheeling a trojan horse full of greek soldiers into the turkish embassy.. (can we park this here?)

Sure. Here [google.com] it is. The Australian Army actually let them into the courtyard of their base. At least then someone yelled check out the horse. But amazingly the Opera House is part of the APEC lock down yet during the Torjan Horse prank they went right past security with the horse.

Wrong Synopsis.

[donscarletti (569232)]

The Australian Army did not let it in and were the only ones to check inside of it. Also, this was filmed months before APEC when the only security concern with the opera house was preventing drunk students from farting in the tubas.

Re:Previous pranks

[microbrewer (774971)]

Bruce Schneier also points to one of the Chasers videos about regarding racial profiling and terrorsim on his blog .

"How Australian Authorities Respond to Potential Terrorists

Watch the video of how the Australian authorities react when someone -- dressed either as an American or Arab tourist -- films the Sydney Harbor Bridge and a nuclear reactor.

The synopsis: The Arab is intercepted within three minutes both times, while the U.S. tourist is given instructions on how to get inside the nuclear facility.

Moral for terrorists: dress like an American.

By the way, Lucas Heights is a research reactor. It produces medical isotopes and performs research, and doesn't produce power."

http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2007/04/how_ australian.html [schneier.com]

The video can be found here
http://youtube.com/watch?v=McB9tsabPn0 [youtube.com]

Re:

[Nefarious Wheel (628136)]

Actually most people in AUSTRALIA (ie, where they're from) have heard of them

I haven't. Does this presuppose the use of television or some such nonsense?

Re:Previous pranks

[Chuck Chunder (21021)]

I haven't. Does this presuppose the use of television or some such nonsense?

Unless we've had a sudden population drop it merely presupposes that you don't constitute most Australians. Seeing as I am one too you can't possibly be more than 50%

Re:Previous pranks

[sholden (12227)]

In my *long* stay at Sydney University the only time Honi Soit could be called vaguely readable was when they were running it. That's fame enough in my book. Though I doubt most people in Australia have heard of them. Then again most Australians don't know who Arch Bevis is either.

Re:Previous pranks

[Just because I'm an (847583)]

Yesterday there was a picture of a bomb squad officer in full outfit defusing a sleeping bag published in the daily tabloid. There's been several stories of media officers being told to pick up credentials to access the restricted zone inside the restricted zone, which they can't get into because they don't have their passes, which they're trying to pick up, which they can't... etc. Example [smh.com.au]

On the one hand I can see that the police and the millions of rent-a-cop types have to take everything ultra seriously just incase one of the leaders (though according to most of the news George "Nucular" Bush and some Chinese guy nobody knows the name of are the only ones in town) does end up karking it in Sydney... it would look bad. On the other hand it's all a big farce.

The police bought a truck mounted water cannon [smh.com.au] (but NSW rents a water crane [smh.com.au] to battle bushfires every summer, priorities eh) for this event and cleared jails [news.com.au] to make room for the protesters the police plan to arrest. I guess if they can boast they managed to jail a guy that looks like Osama Bin Laden they'll get the merit badge they were after.

Re:

[Organic User (1103717)]

I didn't link to the ABC website because it is supposed to be for Australians only to view. They aren't doing anything to non-Australians but if at the end of the month most of their bandwidth bill is from international traffic be sure they will start ip locking it. The ABC is happy with their content being available on as many possible channels (they even upload torrents of their shows to bit torrent networks) as long as they aren't paying the bandwidth bill.

Re:

[unfunk (804468)]

levy heavy sanctions against the ABC?

But... how the hell would that work, considering that the ABC is a publicly funded corporation? I'm sure if Little Johnny cut the ABC's funding much further, plenty of Aussies will be up in arms over it. It really is the last bastion of quality television journalism in this country.

No particular reason

[michaelmalak (91262)]

"No particular reason we chose Canada" ... except for the two I'm about to mention.

"Security was working"

[Alicat1194 (970019)]

Which is why they only let them through 2 checkpoints (2 being the secret number of the day).

Re:"Security was working"

[ben there... (946946)]

According to the video, they didn't catch on until one of them stepped out dressed as Osama bin Laden. The only reason they were caught was their completely absurd attire. And the security guys pat each other on the back for that. I'm not sure which part is funniest, but I'm definitely laughing.

Re:"Security was working"

[Mordough (1104631)]

In other news, President Bush claimed victory over terrorism with the apprehension of Osama bin Laden at the Apec Leaders Conference in Sydney today. Osama had infiltrated the Australian comedy group The Chaser, to gain entry to the conference, but highly trained security guards were able to see through the deception and placed him under arrest.

Yep, that's Osama, alright!

[objekt (232270)]

I'd recognize that hat anywhere!

Major embarassment

[evilgrug (915703)]

It frightens me that there's a very real chance that had castmember Chas Licciardello not been dressed up as Osama Bin Laden, they could have made it all the way inside.

Of course the police are spinning this and saying that due to the arrests its 'proof' that security works and the $170 million spent on security was well worth it, despite the fact that Candian flags and fake APEC stickers on the hood are all that's required to get within ten metres of the President's hotel.

Re:Major embarassment

[Richard W.M. Jones (591125)]

It frightens me that there's a very real chance that had castmember Chas Licciardello not been dressed up as Osama Bin Laden, they could have made it all the way inside.

It frightens you? Why?

Perhaps our "leaders" should not have so much security. Might make them concentrate a little more on not having policies which ruin so many lives and drive people to want to murder them, eh?

Personally I think it's a huge shame that I can't walk up to the Prime Minister and argue with him about his policies.

Rich.

Re:Major embarassment

[Organic User (1103717)]

Personally I think it's a huge shame that I can't walk up to the Prime Minister and argue with him about his policies.

You can catch up with John Howard every morning during daily walks. The Chaser did a prank about this during the first series after a school kid came up to Howard with a screw driver and hugged him. You can watch it here [google.com] (low quality).

Re:Major embarassment

[TubeSteak (669689)]

It frightens you? Why?

Because when Heads of State violently die it tends to cause chaos, political/economic instability and/or wars.

Perhaps our "leaders" should not have so much security. Might make them concentrate a little more on not having policies which ruin so many lives and drive people to want to murder them, eh?

That's the dumbest thing I've heard today.
There is always going to be some extreme nutters who hate the current leaders and their policies.

Personally I think it's a huge shame that I can't walk up to the Prime Minister and argue with him about his policies.

I agree that it's a shame, but you have at least one Representative. Talk to them. They are your voice to the PM.

Re:Major embarassment

[sasha328 (203458)]

It frightens you? Why?

Because when Heads of State violently die it tends to cause chaos, political/economic instability and/or wars.

This is true for absolute leaders (such as in the USA). For Westminister system democracies (UK, Australia, Canada etc) the death of a leader does not lead to instability. The party will usually vote for a replacment leader. It is the party that leads the country (with a strong leader obviously) rather than an individual.
 
The reason I'm saying this is because in such countries, the leader, although protected, is not living in total isolation behind barricades and barriers. I've seen our leaders (in Australia) on many occasions, and I usually cross to the other side of the street so I don't bump into them.
 
I remember one occasion in Perth when the defence minister (back then) walked in with his family to a food court to have lunch. No guards, no security (at least none we could see).
That's the kind of country I want to live in.

Re:

[Clover_Kicker (20761)]

Perhaps if the citizens want you dead, you are doing something wrong?

Yeah, Lincoln had it coming.

And don't get me started on Garfield.

Re:Major embarassment

[Dr Caleb (121505)]

Yep. Can't stop the crazies. Especially that Nermal fella.

Re:

[cheezedawg (413482)]

As you and other posters point out - you can't stop the crazies, but you can stop the regular Joes by simply doing your job well enough not to anger anyone that much.

What world do you live in where plotting an assasination doesn't qualify a person as "crazy"?

Re:

[Dr Caleb (121505)]

"What world do you live in where plotting an assasination doesn't qualify a person as "crazy"?"

What are the reasons the assassination is being plotted? Voices in your head?

I live in a world where the CIA tried to kill Castro several times, simply because he took back his country from gangsters. Castro was doing what he thought right. So did the CIA.

Here in my country of Canada, we haven't had a Prime Minister assasinated, or even attempted. None have been worthy enough, before or since Trudeau. My Prov

Re:

[IBBoard (1128019)]

Personally I think it's a huge shame that I can't walk up to the Prime Minister and argue with him about his policies.

I think there's an issue of practicality there, though. If we could walk up to our leaders (without having to pretend to be Canadians in a motorcade) then there'd be too many people crammed around them all trying to argue about dozens of different things!

If only politicians could do what the people want, rather than what the people need.

(I'll leave it up to the reader as to whether the previ

Re:Major embarassment

[Quiet_Desperation (858215)]

Perhaps our "leaders" should not have so much security. Might make them concentrate a little more on not having policies which ruin so many lives and drive people to want to murder them, eh?

John Hinckley shot Ronald Reagan because Hinckley was obsessed on Jodie Foster. Public figures, political or not, are lightning rods for every type of kook under the sun.

I'm sorry we don't live in the rosy, bunny filled universe you seem to desire, but that's the way things are.

What's the frequency, Kenneth?

Re:Major embarassment

[SlayerofGods (682938)]

Actually... if they hadn't been stopped he wouldn't have gotten out. Therefore they were pulled over first, which seems to indicate that the security was on to them at least some what.

And truthfully from a security stand point this makes sense.
You don't want to stop a motorcade at the first checkpoint otherwise an enemy (I know it's Australia, just saying) could just set up watching the check point and wait for his target to be stopped there. What they should be doing is wave an 'obvious' motorcade through the first level of security and then check them out deeper in where it's safe.

Further the article doesn't make it clear what these check points were. Perhaps the first one was just a couple of guys on foot charged with turning away anyone that doesn't have clear business in the area, and not what everyone pictures when they think of a check point as barbed wire, sandbags, gates, guys with machine guns, ect. /Just saying

Re:Major embarassment

[ben there... (946946)]

Actually... if they hadn't been stopped he wouldn't have gotten out. Therefore they were pulled over first, which seems to indicate that the security was on to them at least some what.

And truthfully from a security stand point this makes sense.

Only one problem. That's not what happened [news.com.au].

A source inside The Chaser's War on Everything revealed the team never expected to get so far. The skit had been approved by ABC lawyers but was written in the assumption they would be stopped at the first checkpoint.

Instead they were waved through the first on Macquarie St, then a second, which had sniffer dogs, and eventually stopped themselves at Bridge St.

"As they did Chas got out of a car dressed as Osama bin Laden and said something like 'I'm an important world leader why don't I have a seat at the APEC table?'. Apparently that was the first time the police realised it was not authentic and they swooped in and arrested everybody," the source said.

Re:Major embarassment

[SlayerofGods (682938)]

If the enemy can view their attempt at being stopped, it means they haven't got close to what's being protected.

But what you're trying to protect is the people in the motorcade. By stopping them in plain view you're in fact putting them at risk.

Let's say you stop everyone at the checkpoint and the enemy knows this. All he has to do is find a spot overlooking the checkpoint (not hard in a dense urban area), bring a machine gun, then just wait till the target shows up. So Bush's 10 car motorcade comes rolling up and are all force to stop to be cleared. Now all the guy has to do is open fire at the cars which are basically trapped between the checkpoint gate and the car behind them and even if he can't tell which one Bush is in he's bound to hit something before anyone can react in the chaos.

The only way to protect against this is to either build massive secure checkpoints which would be hard in the middle of an active city. Or have multilayered security where the outer checkpoints make sure guys carrying machine guns don't get through and the inner security makes sure everything is safe and you don't have guys dressed like bin Laden wondering around.

But really though, the news article simply doesn't give you enough information to properly critique Sydney security. For example, why was the motorcade pulled over? Did they simply get lucky or was it proper procedure to check out motorcades once they've cleared the other checkpoints? How close were they to hotel? A 'block adjacent to the InterContinental Hotel' was rather vague. Were they close enough that if it had been a car bomb that people in the hotel would have been at risk? Was there still more security between where they were pulled over and where the diplomats were staying? IE if they had punched the gas would anyone important been at risk?

The news media is just doing what the news media does, trying to be sensational. I take everything they say with a grain of salt.
In the end though was security not as strong as it could be? Probably. But is it as bad as the news is making it sound? Probably not.

Re:Major embarassment

[unfunk (804468)]

But really though, the news article simply doesn't give you enough information to properly critique Sydney security. For example, why was the motorcade pulled over? Did they simply get lucky or was it proper procedure to check out motorcades once they've cleared the other checkpoints? How close were they to hotel? A 'block adjacent to the InterContinental Hotel' was rather vague. Were they close enough that if it had been a car bomb that people in the hotel would have been at risk? Was there still more security between where they were pulled over and where the diplomats were staying? IE if they had punched the gas would anyone important been at risk?

The news media is just doing what the news media does, trying to be sensational. I take everything they say with a grain of salt.
In the end though was security not as strong as it could be? Probably. But is it as bad as the news is making it sound? Probably not.

Well, the fact that you're reading a CNN report on it kinda skews the whole thing - check out http://www.abc.net.au/news [abc.net.au] for a more Aussie view on it. The Lateline (our country's best/most reliable news program) report claimed that the motorcade pulled up - of their own accord - outside Bush's hotel, and that security wasn't alarmed until Chaz stepped out, dressed as Osama bin Laden. The chief of police then went on record as saying that his boys did a good job, and that the arrest of the eleven people involved proved that the $160 million was well spent.

I'm sorry? Would it have been "well spent" if those cars were laden full of explosives and detonated outside the hotel? I doubt it.

That said, I love the chaser boys; they know a good prank when they see one, and also know when they're crossing the line... not that it ever stops them.

Re:

[Rogerborg (306625)]

>It frightens me

How many new laws and restrictions on liberty would it take to reassure you?

Re:

[JonathanR (852748)]

It doesn't frighten me at all. The whole episode is a complete farce.

Tell me: Why can the CBD of the biggest Australian metropolis suffer a complete lock-down in the name of a pyjama-party for a few world leaders, while Melbourne can't even host a car-free day [theage.com.au] in part of its CBD? It strikes me that something is wrong with our priorities.

Re:Major embarassment

[drsmithy (35869)]

No one lives in the CBD. Unless you sleep in your office this shouldn't effect you because it is going to be a public holiday and you should have no reason to be in the CBD.

There's quite a few apartment buildings in, or very near, the lockdown zone. The Toaster, for example, is right next to the Opera House. Not to mention things like the ferry terminal being smack bang in the middle of it all, the pubs, hotels, general tourist attractions, etc. The Sydney CBD isn't like, say, central London - it's not a deserted wasteland on a non-work day.

Whoever thought Sydney was an appropriate place to hold something like APEC should be fired for incompetence. An island resort or relatively isolated hotel(s), would have been a far saner place to have all the meetings. Much less disruption to local residents, businesses and tourists, much easier and cheaper to secure.

Downer on the comedy group's motives

[.c (115916)]

"Whatever you think of the humor of 'The Chaser,' the honest truth is they were clearly not going to harm anybody in a physical way," Downer said. "They presumably were, as is the nature of their show, aiming to humiliate a lot of well-known people."

For a politician, this type of harm could be career-ending -- public opinion is everything.

This is Australia

[Chuck Chunder (21021)]

We already know all politicians are dick heads, we don't worship them (or want to) as many Americans seem to do.

Have they gone too far this time?

[hools1234 (789912)]

These guys are seriously the funniest thing on Australian TV. They are extremely witty and some of their comedy is so well thought out, you really wonder where they get it from. There is some great footage of this weeks episode on Youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DxXAr0R43dQ [youtube.com] where they try to see how big a weapon they can smuggle in to a jail, including a rocket, a small canon (disguised poorly as a babies pram) and a tank! Some very clever gags about APEC also. Have they gone too far this time though? With times so security conscious, dressing up as Osama and getting that close to the US Presidents quarters, they are lucky they weren't fired upon! Funny though.

Re:Have they gone too far this time?

[garcia (6573)]

Have they gone too far this time though? With times so security conscious, dressing up as Osama and getting that close to the US Presidents quarters, they are lucky they weren't fired upon!

No, they haven't gone too far. By pointing out that the US has a huge and unnecessary motorcade in a foreign country, it opens my eyes to yet another fleecing of America by the douchebags in office. By pointing out that people may be arrested for nothing more than a prank mostly because it embarrassed the security forces supposedly increased for the visit of someone "so important", it shows me that the countries we live in suck compared to 10 years ago.

Someone needs to continually point out the failures and by doing it with comedic value, a larger majority of people will pay attention.

Re:

[deniable (76198)]

That's what one of the senior cops said. Something about all the snipers on the building would have shot them. If that's the case, the snipers are a bigger threat than a terrorist.

hilair

[SkunkPussy (85271)]

I've seen some of their clips on youtube and they're pretty damn funny!!

Over here in the UK, the main Aussie telly we're blessed with are neighbours and home & away - I would swap war on everything for neighbours any day!!

If they had tried to do that in the U.S.

[elrous0 (869638)]

After their arrest, the Bush administration and Justice Department officials immediately hold a press conference to brag about how they've busted up another terrorist cell, ending with "See, all these new wiretapping laws are working!"

Transcript of the arresting moment

[Dystopian Rebel (714995)]

Guard: Where are you from?
Australian Mimicking A Canadian: We're the Canadian delegation. Where's the hockey rink?
Guard: We don't have a hockey rink here, Sir. [Addressing AMAC bin Laden.] Are you from the Middle East, Sir?
AMAC-BL: Yes, from Montreal.
Guard: Who is Margaret Atwood?
AMAC-BL: [pause] She's the wife of Wayne Gretzky.
Guard: Step out of the car, Sir.

APEC Protest Coverage

[essence (812715)]

You can get some grass roots coverage of the protests against APEC at Sydney Indymedia [indymedia.org.au].

Utterly Un-Australian

[Malekin (1079147)]

I feel that it was utterly un-Australian to arrest these guys. It was a complete waste of police & justice system resources, and really only a pathetic attempt to legitimise the $170 million spent on the ridiculous security theatre show borking up Sydney's CBD.

Re:

[Rogerborg (306625)]

Calm down, Sparky. What would be un-Whatever would be to charge or convict them. Merely detaining them and then moving them off site while you figure out if they are who they say they are is common sense.

eep

[Verte (1053342)]

Remember why the Glasshouse got axed? You can't be critical of the Liberal party's ridiculous actions! Especially when [click]

On the topic of the Chaser

[smegged (1067080)]

Just an FYI for everyone out there, the Chaser is a show which is broadcast by the ABC, a PUBLICALLY FUNDED channel here in Australia. They constantly poke fun of security, politicians and current affairs shows (among other things). They are a great example of democracy done right.

For some interesting clips see:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs3SfNANtig [youtube.com]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RnP0snh_1cU [youtube.com]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W3grHjibNdA [youtube.com]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-BOMOVV2pf0 [youtube.com]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vc5xTZGUrRQ [youtube.com]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GViD0Zwc3Bg [youtube.com]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-6F8GN8eXI [youtube.com]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nwJ9s1RdGhc& [youtube.com]

Many more are freely available on youtube and other sites. The ABC doesn't mind you distributing them either.

Nice to see...

[Eevee1 (1147279)]

$1545454.55 AUD (Take 20-25% off to get USD) per person. That's a complete and utter bargain. AND THEY'LL BE WALKING OUT THE DOOR AFTER PRICES HAVE BEEN MASSIVELY REDUCED!

Re:tagged Slashkos - kdawsonfud

[faloi (738831)]

Any particular reason for this story other than another kdawsonfud attempt to get a slam in at Bush?

Sure. The technology hooks are self evident. You can, ummm, find clips of the guys on youtube. And, err, well, we're pretty sure one of them had a cell phone. And the cameras, don't get me started about the cameras!

Re:tagged Slashkos - kdawsonfud

[Guzzitza (1000386)]

Well, considering the government is spending 170 million on security, which includes a lot of technological crap - such as choppers flying around blocking mobile phone signals, it seems important to note that all you need is 3 cars, a couple of flags, and a fake sticker to bypass all that security... I know it isn't massively relevant, but it is funny.