Comments on: Breaking news: Whole-body scanning banned as primary screening device by House

By: mirabelle

mirabelle — Sat, 26 Dec 2009 08:22:14 +0000

I’m always pulled out for secondary screening as my name seems to come close to the name of a terrorist or maybe because I was in the USA on Sept11th. Go figure. Teddy Kennedy was even on a no fly list at some point!
Obviously I will refuse to be scanned. They can pat me down if it makes them feel safer but that’s it. Luckily noone can force me as it is not mandatory.
It’s unbelievable that some people accept just any intrusion in their lives just to take a plane.
Besides the terrorists have found a new way of passing stuff through this scanner as well so it just gives a false sense of safety.

By: More full-body scanners? The better to see you naked

More full-body scanners? The better to see you naked — Fri, 27 Nov 2009 17:22:39 +0000

[...] these machines can be used for secondary screening. The U.S. House of Representatives have already sounded off loudly and clearly about their disagreement with TSA when it comes to using these full-body virtual strip machines as [...]

By: Hapgood

Hapgood — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 19:18:48 +0000

Anonymous1, I’m sure you’re very happy with the TSA’s approach of no debate at all. Make the decision behind closed doors, issue the appropriate classified regulation, and then foist it on the public (perhaps with some self-congratulatory propaganda about how it will make air travel safer and more convenient for everyone). If you don’t like it, go take a Greyhound bus.

Is that really the sort of country you want to live in?

By: Anonymous1

Anonymous1 — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 19:45:41 +0000

@Kathleen: Yes please continue to bring up extreme, non-sensical, canned-phrase ideas that ignore the facts. It makes your “side” so much more rational in this debate…..not.

By: Kathleen Eaton

Kathleen Eaton — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 18:50:37 +0000

For those that believe a visual strip search is the least we can all submit to for national security and that people who object to this are prudes or ashamed of their bodies, well then why not require that all air passengers arrive at the airport naked, with no luggage…..isn’t that even BETTER! Then, if people object to that, they can be called prudes and be told they are ashamed of their bodies and they are just being selfish and not caring about plane’s crashing…..yeah…..that will work!

K-

By: JHK

JHK — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 18:50:15 +0000

I see alot of people saying no to many inovative security systems. No racial profiling. No technological body screening. At the same time there are numerous complaints about the level of screening by the TSA at airports. Can any of the nay-sayers give an idea of a reasonable solution? What are you willing to do to be safe on an aircraft?

By: Anonymous1

Anonymous1 — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 18:39:54 +0000

@J: He ignored the facts I brought up in my post and instead made broad over-generalizations and didn’t reference any facts. Bravo indeed…

By: J

Fri, 05 Jun 2009 17:42:03 +0000

Hapgood – I could not have said it better myself. Bravo.

By: John

John — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 16:09:40 +0000

Congrats to all of those who ignoed the facts and used fear and hype to make the rest of us less safe.

Let me see … countries have designed mines that have 0 metal in them so they don’t set off mine detectors. Most mine detectors and metal detectors work on the same principal.

No. No one could ever sneak an explosive device through a metal detector.

Do a google search for ceramic knife. Wow a ceramic knife has no metal in it. You could walk through a metal detector with it and not set it off.

Umm… in 30 secs I just named to threats that current screening does not account for and would be caught in a new system. Its not like you can’t buy ceramic knives on the internet or anything. Ceramicknife.org even admits that the blade would not be picked up by a metal detector.

By: Hapgood

Hapgood — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 15:54:11 +0000

Joe, put down that glass of TSA Kool-Aid for a minute and think. The scanner obviously does not produce a “ghostly blurry image.” That would be useless for the intended purpose of detecting concealed items. Rather, it produces a very detailed image the passenger’s naked body, sufficient (in theory) to let the screeners accurately distingush between an innocent traveler and an armed terrorist. That high level of detail is what makes the scanner a (theoretically) effective security tool. If you believe that the TSA keeps us safe, a tool that inspects people in high detail is exactly what you’d want.

The TSA’s propagandists understandably want to de-emphasize the inherently intrusive nature of the technology. So they’re intentionally vague (or perhaps deceptive) about the level of detail the scanners produce. They would very much like people like you to believe that it produces a “ghostly blurry image” that’s friendly, safe, and efficient. Nobody could possibly object to that. They don’t want you to think deeply about what it actually means. They want you to be afraid of terrorists and therefore willing to accept unquestioningly whatever they want to do. They want you to trust them and believe that it’s all necessary and effective, regardless of whether it actually is either or whether they deserve our trust.

Call it whatever you want. Surround it with propaganda to prevent the fearful, shallow-thinking public from objecting to it. But the scanner is a strip search, pure and simple. And strip searching all passengers could indeed provide a significant enhancement to the TSA’s ability to provide the final defense against terrorist plotters.

However, the concept of strip searching every air traveler represents such a significant change to the balance of privacy and security that it demands a full public debate in Congress. An unaccountable bureaucracy should not have the authority to decide that balance unilaterally behind closed doors. That’s the real problem with the scanners that gets lost in the emotional reactions of fear and prudery.