//
you're reading...
Beyond Atlantic City

Full Body Airport Scanners

The discussion on the 2 January show was intense over whether or not there should be full body scanners in airports and if so, in what capacity.

There was some uncertainly as to what exactly is seen in a full body scan.   The following are some images from  full body scanners:

Do you think these full body scanners should be used?  If so, in what capacity?   Leave your comments below.   I will share some of the comments on my next show.

Image sources – http://www.projo.com/blogs/shenews/photos/rapi_scan_lg.jpg & http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/brainiac/airport_xray_scanner-thumb.jpg & http://www.dvorak.org/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/tsa-body-scan.jpg

Advertisements

About Jesse O. Kurtz

I am committed to fulfilling the promise of Atlantic City. The town would benefit from greater political participation by average citizens. Hopefully, some of the posts herein will encourage you to get more involved in your community. This blog will also feature other topics and subjects beyond Atlantic City. I hope that you will come to love Atlantic City as much, or more than I do.

Discussion

74 thoughts on “Full Body Airport Scanners

  1. Body scanners are humiliating and invasive. If ever installed there must be a screen where the scanned person can also see her-himself and it must never be obligatory but a voluntary procedure. Imagine people ho still got some morals, pudity and self respect ordered to undergo this scandalous invasion into body intimacy.

    Posted by hannes schick | January 11, 2010, 9:46 pm
  2. It’s understandable to have the scanners for high risk passengers, but completely absurd to require every passenger to submit to this demoralizing and intrusive procedure. What of the children? Will we be forced to discard the modesty of our children and subject them to the eyes of strangers?

    Posted by Lynn Beck | January 13, 2010, 9:09 am
    • High risk passengers? What of the children? You are absurd and clearly completely out of touch.

      Posted by Dave Harris | November 22, 2010, 7:08 pm
      • why so offensive mr. harris? or are you selling these machines? why don’t you use arguments instead. the world is sick and tired of offensive guys with no arguments such as you.

        Posted by hannes schick | March 19, 2011, 8:58 pm
  3. Seriously? I think I would have more sexual arousal looking at a Barbie doll than those blurry blobs. I, as a father of a two year old daughter, would rather have someone look at a blurry picture that shows NO DETAILS, then have some whack-job try to blow the plane up. Wake up people, we are not free from attacks. I guarentee you any of the near 3000 people who died on September 11th (oh, how quickly we have forgotten that date) would have rather gone through this “humiliating and invasive” or “demoralizing and intrusive” procedure and be ALIVE than buried in a grave forgotten by the people who at one point “proudly” said “we will not forget”. The end.

    Posted by Paul Reit | January 22, 2010, 9:01 pm
    • Paul Reit,

      I think its people like you that need to wake up. You are okay and willing to let the government just infringe on all your rights? As Ben Franklin said “Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. If you are okay with giving the government this kind of power then you may as well give up any other freedom you have left.

      Posted by john | October 23, 2010, 1:44 am
      • Seriously? The government infringing on our rights? Since when is air travel a right, let alone one granted by the government? Does the government also infringe on our rights by requiring car insurance when you drive?

        If you don’t like the new standards, don’t fly. But seriously, its a lot easier to abuse a pat-down than these vague images.

        In every new era, personal freedoms are given up for the good of social progress. If you aren’t willing to give anything up, then step aside so the rest of us can keep moving forward.

        Posted by Kayli | November 13, 2010, 8:54 am
      • Plus – that is today’s technology… just let everyone get used to this today… no big deal anymore… then after another security lapse, we’ll come out with the new, very detailed, technology. Oh, and trust the government will always keep this information private and not keep record. Yea – govt. never takes more. They never pass more laws… more regulations… more non-criminal “civil” fines… sure it must stop somewhere… right?

        Posted by Christopher | November 15, 2010, 5:55 pm
      • Kayli you are right airtravel is not a right however it is government regulated, and privacy is a right I am a soldier in the Army, and have deployed twice to Iraq and watched my friends die to protect that right, and I am quite disturbed that the government that I serve so carelessly is disregarding the rights that my friends and brothers died to protect. Also it is very easy for you to say just don’t fly because you don’t care where as some of us have no other choice but to fly, and even before this we had to deal with more intensive security measures in the name of being nonbiased, how about we make everyone of arabic decent go through this. one thing I have learned from being in the Army and from being stationed in Germany is we do not have the luxury of political correctness when it comes to the saftey of our people.

        Posted by Mike | November 23, 2010, 5:01 pm
      • Giving up our rights one by one means playing right into the hands of the terrorists…this is exactly what they’ve been aiming to achieve with us infidels!! We must all collectively stand by our rights and our dignity, that’s why this body scanner issue has been taking over the media airwaves lately…what rights do we have anymore?!!

        Posted by cherii45 | November 24, 2010, 12:22 pm
    • When you say 9/11 yes they hijacked a plane and crashed it into the WTC, it was a tragedy. I travel on every form of transportation and the only time when I have to go through security is in the COMMERCIAL airport. I went and flew a Cessna the other day, hopped in, received clearance from ATC and flew off. Why no invasive security when I fly that way, actually no security at all? That sort of plane could have easily been flown into the WTC. When I get on a train, there is no body scanner, metal detector, and hardly a security guard when I’m at the station. There’s more of a threat to your safety when you’re standing in line to go through security at the airport then would ever be on the airplane. That is all I have to say.

      Posted by J L | November 23, 2010, 12:10 am
  4. I heard that the scanners are not so much for weapons or terrorist, but more so to tell who is human and who is not when traveling…Don’t know how true it is but interesting information…

    Posted by junk | February 1, 2010, 11:46 am
  5. “Oh, how quickly we have forgotten that date”

    How quickly? It was NINE years ago. Nine years since any serious terrorist attack. And the most recent exploding panty guy was a complete failure.

    Are people really so afraid of death that they are willing to throw away their freedom on the almost non-existant chance of a virtual impossibility happening to them? We’re supposed to have freedom of choice without government interference in this country. Where’s the airport I can choose that doesn’t have TSA stamped all over it? I’d rather risk being blown up than submit to all these procedures. Where’s the lineup for that?

    Posted by Todd | February 3, 2010, 9:43 pm
    • Mexico. Where their version of customs includes hitting a button which turns on a traffic light. If the light turns green, you’re free to pass without having any of your things looked at, but if the light turns red, they tear apart every belonging you have brought with you. Would you rather trust the security of your country to an arbitrary button?

      You do have freedom of choice… don’t fly.

      Posted by Kayli | November 13, 2010, 8:57 am
      • The point of that is to be a random search. It is about just as effecient as subjecting everyone to ionizing radiation. I found it interesting that you only used the pronoun “you” including when refering to “your country” is that to antaganize todd for wanting the right to have to chose the level of invasiveness he will allow to ensure his safety. Does he, not deserve the right to travel freely, assuming he is of no harm, to become globally aware and not be satisfied with the stereo-typical American ideology that knowing of the outside is unimportant and that other countries are not even worhty of our capability. Also, interesting that you chose to degrade the status of mexican security by ignoring what the “arbitrary button” represents. A lottery of sorts in which eveyone has a possibility of having their luggage searched, not having their naked bodies blurrily projected on a screen. Which makes me question to what lengths are you willing to go to for your security, hmm, what more will you be willing to give up?

        Posted by Becky | November 17, 2010, 10:43 pm
  6. Hello, What about the health-risk implications. There is no safe amount of ionizing radiation for any living body to be subjected to. None, Zero, Zip…. It’s already proven to be a serious cause of cancer. Women’s breast tissue is especially at risk. Who really cares about the naked photos when the health risks are sound and proven?

    Posted by Michele | February 16, 2010, 4:17 pm
    • Health risk implications must be considered. There is no safe level of radiation, any first year biology student knows this. We need to be given an option of a “pat down” instead of going through the full body scan. If you think the gov’t cares about potential health risk of going through these machines, I have a bridge to sell you as well.

      Posted by A. Wiese | February 18, 2010, 2:00 pm
  7. I definately agree with Michele and A Wiese the health risks in this definately need to be looked at!! there are people who travel very frequently what effects will all of this have on them! who is going to be responsible if they get cancer from all of this! young children, pregnant women, elderly people who are already suffering from multiply illnesses they are all at such high risk from all of this!!! i would rather go through an actual strip search than expose myself to all this risky technology! nobody knows what effects this is going to have!! i am not against making sure air travel is safe but surely there has got to be a much better way of going about it!!!

    Posted by andi | March 9, 2010, 6:38 am
  8. Paul Reit… So you are ok with some airport screener looking at a scanned naked image of your 2 year old daughter? Kids will not be excluded.

    Posted by Mike Loury | March 10, 2010, 8:18 am
  9. Those who trade freedom for a sense of security will end up with neither. If you know any American history, you may know who put forward this idea, as well as realize we have lost far more freedoms than we still have. Those few we do have, are thoroughly regulated, taxed, and dictated by our better-knowing Government. Everyday “rights” have now become “privileges”, with an accompanying fee, license, fines and/or restrictions. Airport scanners are more about control and perception than of any use. You want safe aircraft, do profiling for those who fit the bill of those who present the danger. Scanning kids and grandmas and Svens and Hildas will not catch the Jihadist allowed to pass freely because he/she was not the random next person. You just wait, Muslims will get a “pass” due to religious reasons. Pre-9/11 mentality indeed! History will repeat itself to those who don’t learn from it. Want to fly safe? Fly El Al. No, I’m not Jewish, but I know a system that works when I see one.

    Posted by Mike | March 14, 2010, 12:21 pm
  10. Those who would trade a little liberty for a little security deserve neither and will lose both.

    There ya’ have it.

    Posted by MC1171611 | March 19, 2010, 10:21 am
  11. I think it is wrong to have these scanners for one thing, but believe they are here to stay. That said, where do you set the standard for how they are to be used?

    First I would only have guys scanning guys and women scanning women. Women can scan children too. I do not think it is right that guys are looking at women naked like this all day and please don’t tell me that guys aren’t going to find it arousing because I don’t believe it.

    But if these scanners are going to stay then I would like to know what makes a person high risk and more in need of a scan than others? we have white extremists as well as other nations that want to cause death and mayhem. Do w segregate one race from another? In today’s society I think that is impossible to do and there would be more court and law actions over such discrimination.

    I will say I hate the word discrimination, because it is used all too frequently these days and its the white guys that are getting discriminated against more than most. But that is a different issue.

    So ban them? It wont happen, Select few to pass though the scanners? It wont happen, Have kids viewed with these scanners? I think you will find extremists are willing to sacrifice much in the name of religion and faith even if they are sick bastards for doing so, this means all need to go through. But with moderation of my ideas above. Females looking at same sex and kids and guys looking at same sex.

    I don’t have a problem with that. But will say this, we have no freedom rights or liberties anymore, the moment they hit the towers it was all taken away from us. Political correctness at its most evil.

    Posted by Paul | March 19, 2010, 4:08 pm
  12. I believe a scanned photo of the airport employees who are running the machines and looking at the scans should be posted by the scanning booths for all to see! It is only fair. All airport employees should have to be scanned daily before going to their job posts.

    But seriously, it is a small percentage of people who were killed on board the airplanes on 911, as compared to the numbers of people who have flown since then and not been killed by terrorists on planes. 911 is just an excuse to whittle away at individual rights and privacy. It’s only a matter of time before this and other invasive requirements turn the USA into a Nazi-like dictatorship. Papers! Schnell!!

    Posted by ScanYou!! | March 20, 2010, 8:50 pm
    • As an airport employee we are “scanned” daily every time we arrive to work, and then multiple times a day as we travel between secured and unsecured area’s of the airport. However, as an airport employee I have also undergone several intense background checks to obtain a badge which simply allows me access to the inside of the airport terminal. We cannot go on a plane or even access the ramps – travelers with a boarding pass can go further than we can.

      We see the TSO’s daily, are friendly with them, socialize with them, see them around the community – I for one do not want to have them viewing me with a body scanner or groping me.

      Ask yourself this…. how would you feel if you were told you had to undergo a strip search to attend your job? I’m not talking about a pilot, or airplane maintenance or baggage handler…. I’m talking about the person who sells you a newspaper, cup of coffee, or shines your shoes.

      I believe that the security is necessary, and at times has to be tightened for everyones safety, but at where do we draw the line between security and human dignity.

      Posted by airport employee | November 11, 2010, 8:55 pm
    • “small percentage of people who were killed on board the airplanes on 9/11, as compared to the numbers of people who have flown since then”

      Where were you when 9/11 occurred that it is so easy for you to trivialize this event into a percentage?

      Once was one too many times for me. The damage was beyond the lives that were taken – it shattered lives of those still living. While we are still trying to put the pieces back together, people are hard at work to make sure that it won’t happen again. It’s not easy and I don’t envy those who have to make these difficult decisions.

      Personally, I’m not feeling very comfortable with the idea of these scanners either, but your argument is extreme and insensitive. 9/11 is not an excuse – it’s a reality that many people relive when they see political tension, war, and death on the news.

      I do, however, highly doubt we will turn into anything like a Nazi dictatorship. We have our issues in our great country, but our government is not targeting groups based on race, religion, or political views to deport to concentration camps or ghettos where members of those groups will be held hostage.

      I’m glad there are people who are arguing against the scanners. This is not something that should be taken lightly. It is a big change and many scary “what-if’s.” But we have to ask intelligent questions and someone needs to come up with intelligent alternatives. I’ve seen some people have already started to brainstorm. That is a much better use of time than the above fear-driven rant.

      Posted by really? you are going there? | November 23, 2010, 7:24 pm
  13. Knowing the mindset of people.
    Who on earth are thy going to get to view people, teenagers, children… men and women… who will not get their jollys from looking at everyone butt naked.

    I understand, doctors working with naked people, as that is what doctors do.. .but the lower spectrum of paid employees… much like those they get to be guards at prisons, or jailers…. I would not want those people gawking at my 14 year old naked daughter.
    I assure you.
    So, what is the solution?

    Posted by Citizens for Change, America | March 22, 2010, 1:49 am
    • Don’t we have laws against child pornography? Will the be enforced when childrens images are taken?

      Those who would trade a little liberty for even a little security deserve neither, and will lose both.

      Posted by Kelly Martin | November 10, 2010, 11:28 pm
      • that right is taken away as soon as you buy thatticket for that child.I too agree that this is an extreme invasion of privacy.and to have my child exposed to an adult viewing her naked body,and her mothers..whats next? body cavity searches? I mean they dont see the inside,so is that really next? is that so far fetched? its already come this far.there are actually two ttypes of imagers,and contrary to popular opinion,they are VERY detailed.to even suggest that a screener is not going to make a comment about your privates,or share those comments with a co-worker is absurd.

        Posted by B | November 16, 2010, 12:55 pm
  14. This is absolutely disgusting! If we don’t have a sex problem in this country(and we do), we will certainly have one after these intrusive devises are installed. People should refuse to fly and let the airlines suffer until they take them out. Protest and boycott until they listen. This is nothing more than legalized porn, and who says the perv sitting behind the desk just isn’t pleasuring himself while watching, don’t tell me it won’t happen. And as for opting out, well, if one airport has them, it’s just a matter of time until they all are forced to have them. What about small private airports?

    Posted by Karen | March 25, 2010, 5:12 pm
  15. I totally objected to full body scanning which can see through clothing. I cannot even strip in front of strangers in the women’s change room, forgetting about getting a scan which will show my naked body. I want to remain private during airport security check, so I’d rather choose body pad down. I also worry about the radiation from this machine, x-ray isn’t so much fun when I travel more than 3 or 4 times a year. I don’t even get one x-ray in an average 5 years!! I agree to screen the high risk suspicious people. People like myself being small will for sure be more prone to x-ray damage!!

    Posted by Wendy Fung | March 31, 2010, 8:57 pm
    • I totally agree with all of the points you made! Except that I think being padded down is very invasive as well. I fly with my parents usually on at least one trip yearly and on our most recent trip, the airport had a scanner. Luckily, only certain people were made to go through… I’m not sure what I could have done to avoid it if I had been selected, without causing a huge scene and disrupting the airport.

      Posted by Anonymous | July 13, 2010, 9:13 pm
  16. It should be that Male Personnel are manning machines for Scanning men and women personnel are manning (or “womaning”) machines for scanning of women and the lines should be separate.
    Its ridiculous that they have the ability to flesh out the pictures with colour – its a pornographic machine at best and a total perv paradise at worst.

    I feel its a very terrible development and an intrusive technology this is the worst kind of invasion of privacy . Today they have sensors that can detect small parts per million of an explosive compound – so why cant people be made to walk through those kind of sensors instead ?

    Posted by Nadir | April 1, 2010, 3:49 am
  17. At the root of terrorism is drug policy. At the root of drug policy is US paternalism.

    You reap what you sow….

    Posted by Blair Anderson | April 1, 2010, 6:23 pm
  18. almost all the decent ppeople with some dignity agree with the fact that these scanners are total invasion of ones privacy. why are they all so scared of death. believe u me when it has to come, it will no matter where u are and how mcuh precaution u have taken to prevent it. that doesnt mean one should be totally careless either. i am not suggesting that. no sane person favors terrorism irrespective of religion, race, colour. it should be downregulated but not like this. nadir is right why not use such hi fi technical equipment which detects micro sized metallic particles.
    please the goevernments installing these scanners must be persuaded not to do this. this has already restricted people like us from visiting USA and some european countries. we have our families, friends there whom we need to visit and even if not that then what about tourism.
    scanners is absolutely a NO NO!!!!

    Posted by shulz | April 2, 2010, 5:45 am
  19. What? I can see how people can think it’s invasive but seriously, Pornographic? Come on people pull your head in, take a look at the photos above, you can barely make out a face, breasts and penises are pretty much the only parts you can make out that are obvious and even then they’re just just outlined shapes and in no-way arousing.

    Women would scan Women and Men would scan men. As for strip searches police are the only people in Australia able to do this, pat downs can be done by any security person to another person (theres laws governing how, when, why etc) and when done is also Same gender searches.

    I’m unsure on full details on these machines at present, but the way I percieve them is that upon a detection through the normal magnetometer you’d be asked to step aside and remove any metal items, after this you’d be scanned with the wand in the zone detected, upon picking up further reading with the wand you’d be asked to step into the full body scanner, here is where it will show exactly what the item is as is done on baggage through normal machines.

    Now the radiation through baggage scanners IS dangerous if you pass a human through it but the magnetic field on magnetometers can not be seen/felt and will cause no harm to clothing, camera film, packaged materials, persons or animals.

    If that is how the process is done, these new detectors won’t be scanning everyone, so people that pass through will be able to pass through things as normal, unless you’re a criminal hiding something I can’t see any reason for anyone to be kicking up a stink!

    Posted by Chris | May 4, 2010, 11:28 pm
    • Because it is a violating of my right to privacy. I’m tired of my rights being taken away one by one in the name of safety. We aren’t any safer with all this crap than we were before.

      Posted by Justine | July 20, 2010, 6:40 pm
      • You have the right to remain silent, you also have the right to catch a train, boat, drive a car or even walk. OH and by the way if your away on holidays, no doubt travelling by some other means, and a burglar breaks into your house and steals your stuff, i bet you wouldnt tell the cops, dont bother looking for him, he has a right to privacy. Oh and before you say your not a criminal, i’m sure youve jaywalked or sped or ran a stop sign or whatever in your life, so you are a criminal, go hand yourself into the cops…. NO i didnt think so !!!!

        Posted by Dean | November 15, 2010, 12:12 am
      • You say it’s a violation of your privacy but blowing up the airplane I am seated on is a violation of mine. Unless you’ve got any better ideas I suggest you demand Islamic Men be profiled. Point blank! Once that is done and Islamo Fascists are afraid of even being seen in an airport, you will be safer.

        Posted by Perri | November 16, 2010, 4:41 pm
      • Perri, your comments against Muslims aren’t helping.

        Posted by really? you are going there? | November 23, 2010, 7:46 pm
  20. “He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither.” – Benjamin Franklin.
    I’m all for keeping our country safe, but I say sniffing machines and metal detectors, not full body scan machines… I mean, how much self-dignity are YOU willing to pay for “security.” What’ll be next? Internal body scans to check for those breast implants with PETN in them? C’mon…

    Posted by Marissa | May 8, 2010, 9:25 pm
    • Marissa, when Islamic terrorist start implanting explosives in their rectum, expect a full body cavity search. The problem must be taken care of at the source. If you are of Islamic, Middle Eastern decent, you should be pulled over to the side and grilled. That is how it can be solved.when enough “peaceful Muslims” have had enough they will counter against their counterparts. If they don’t, well, too bad. Islamic Extremism should not be tolerated because of political correctiveness. 13 year old white girls have not been linked to suicide bombings! If you look like a terrorist, you are a terrorist…unless you can prove otherwise, final! ENOUGH IS ENOUGH.

      Posted by Perri | November 16, 2010, 4:48 pm
  21. TSA says the machines have zero storage capacity. They don’t say that the images can be sent elsewhere to be stored.
    Will Muslim women have to submit? Fodder for the Taliban.
    The one real concern. These only scan the outside, when will we have to start undergoing comprehensive x-rays (the kind that all agree are a cancer risk) for full cavity searches?

    Posted by IAmThatStrange | June 9, 2010, 2:08 pm
  22. … Seems to me that the faces have been blurred out in these images but I sincerely doubt that they were blurred in the original taking and were altered for press release…

    Posted by Anonymous | July 13, 2010, 9:22 pm
  23. I just came across this in a search, and it is likely that the amount of radiation is so small the actual flight exposes you to much more. Anybody look that up?

    Posted by jo | July 19, 2010, 5:18 pm
  24. What would women doing women and children and men doing men accomplish? Men may feel just as uncomfortable with a gay man patting them down or looking at their full body scan as a woman doing it. Do you not realize that there are female pedophiles too? Recently At an airport a woman, very obviously a lesbian, wanted to pat me down because I was wearing a dress and she couldn’t see all of my legs. I asked why and she said “because you could be hiding something.” Really? So anyone wearing pants couldn’t possibly be hiding anything? Or maybe a bomb in a babies diaper? I just pulled up my dress to show them how ridiculous it all was. Do they expect me to wear spandex through the airport so they can see every little bump and bulge? The only thing I was hiding was cellulite.

    Posted by Justine | July 20, 2010, 6:36 pm
  25. Also, has anyone seen Total Recall? The fascist rulers used full body scans. It’s a little too close for comfort to me.

    Posted by Justine | July 20, 2010, 6:44 pm
  26. If someone is determined enough they will find a way. If someone has thought of a rule, someone else has thought of a way around it and no amount of security will change that. Body scanners don’t stop rockets or nukes. Let us have our freedom.

    Posted by againstit | July 24, 2010, 12:28 am
  27. I have to travel many airmiles to and from the USA to Europe, we bombarded by Gamma rays on every flight as flight crews know this risk and now without even a blink we are all been iradiated in the name of security. I am pritection officer and have been in this business for 20 years. All this is FLUFF !!!!every western airport has now working in them the very people that we are trying to scan passengers for. They arrive on political asylum get citizenship very fast !! and then next you know they are working in airports, even though both in the USA ans in EUROPE you and i have to have a 10 year background check. Think about it if our political masters had to put this right what a mess !! much more easy to pick on LAW abiding citizens and brain wash them into thinking radiation is safe !! and on the other hand telling us to pull back on medical x rays.

    I rest my case !!!!

    Posted by jtwootton | August 1, 2010, 4:43 am
  28. Children are expendable tools of destruction by radial, evil people (women as well as men). They would happily strap bombs on 8 year old girls and load her on an airplane full of babies for their horrid goals, it HAS happened (not in airplanes, yet) and it WILL happen again!!!

    Privacy is about WHO you are, NOT WHAT you LOOK LIKE. Everyone can see you can take a picture of you, but what they know about you is for you to tell them. Privacy is about not being afraid of police invading your house and life without just cause and warrant.
    So you can be naked yet still have privacy.

    Remember, the Shoe Bomber and the Underwear bomber almost succeeded. VERY close to killing hundreds more innocent people. If that happened, their would be no debate, strip-search for all passengers (as it is, we take off our shoes).

    So, would you rather have security look at blurry picture of YOUR children (and everyone else) knowing no bombs will get on board, or would you risk the lives of your children with someone who may have a bomb in their underwear?

    (could have been written better, but the point is here)

    Posted by Reality Hurts | November 11, 2010, 1:53 pm
  29. Perhaps if we, as Americans, didn’t become so ridiculously politically correct, we could focus on the people who are most likely to commit terrorist acts, like Middle Eastern Men between the ages of 18 and 45! Sounds racist?…too bad, that’s called “profiling” and that is how crimes are prevented and solved. If a group of Italian men were vandalizing a neighborhood then law enforcement would concentrate on “Italian men”. If a spy ring of blonde Russian women were suspect, then Police should question light hair, light skinned White women. BUT the overwhelming majority of suicide bombers, underwear bombers and terrorist attacks are committed by Muslim Men. But, instead, because liberalism and political correctness has run a muck, we concentrate on Catholic Nuns, middle aged women and 3 year old children. It’s preposterous. Nobody wants to go through a full body scanner, yet don’t want to be patted down either. Well it’s tough…we have allowed it to get like this. How about we focus on the those who deserve to be profiled…Islamo Fascists! Let’s try that FOR A CHANGE. The only things that have protected America from another attack are incompetent bombers and inoperative fuses. Hey, Janet Nepalitano, the system ISN’T working! Enough is enough…Islamic Extremist are terrorists and they look like Peaceful Muslims. Sorry to have to report the truth. Don’t be sorry you have to hear it.

    Posted by Perri | November 16, 2010, 3:52 pm
    • at least you’re honest about being an ignorant racist.

      Posted by wow | November 18, 2010, 1:25 am
      • Great reply, without any thing to support your comment, though. So, am I racist against Italians, Russians or Muslims? It’s not called “racism”, it’s called “Racial Profiling”. And it is the only way to keep everybody safe. Everybody who looks like an Islamic Terrorist falls under the category of “probable cause”. You can call me what ever you want…but I am NOT ignorant. The truth is uncomfortable, but it’s the truth.

        Posted by Perri | November 18, 2010, 11:21 am
      • Dear “Wow”

        Your comment is as useless as it is inaccurate. I find this to be true of most liberal thought/speech.

        Posted by susieq57 | November 18, 2010, 7:21 pm
      • dear wow you are rather ignorant yourself, he clearly differentiated between radical extremist muslums and peaceful muslums, and i have been to the middle east been shot at and detained terrorists and guess what the largest group are between 14 and 40 male and Islamic, and they are brainwashed to think this way from the time they can walk. Also most of them one on one seem to be decent people except for the lets kill some Americans part.

        Posted by dick | November 23, 2010, 5:23 pm
  30. I think this is a little hard to swallow…..Please do not preach to me about 9/11! I am a soldier! I also do NOT believe that TSA has the right to subject people to a scanner that both violates me or anyone else. I don’t care what they say will “not” happen with these scans but I don’t want my son to be placed through it nor do I want his privates touched!!!! NO ONE WILL GO THERE!!! I would rather not fly!! And you say thats my right right?! so what happens when I am ordered to go somewhere and the only way to see my son is to fly him there…….I would have to allow a man (since its the same sex) to either touch his privates or look at him with a pedophiles dream job….Right and you can tell me for sure TSA has no sickos?! Just not buying it! There needs to be somthing else….until then I will not fly out of any body scan airports or I will just drive.

    Posted by a soldier | November 16, 2010, 8:50 pm
  31. I am against changing my behavior because of what radical extremists do!!!! As Ben Franklin said, “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.” I believe they are a danger to freedom of thought and movement. I believe that liberty is the cornerstone of the American republic!!!

    Posted by Angel | November 17, 2010, 11:46 am
  32. I believe these body scanners to be the newsest form of pornagraphy. The images I have seen actually show a male or female nude. I don’t fly much buy I won’t agree to this. The full body pat down has been refered to as sexual assult, I agree people feel violated. I’m sure many people don’t like to be touched I know I don’t. My advice is use dogs,their nose knows.

    Posted by Corey Mann Leavenworth, Kansas | November 18, 2010, 11:34 am
  33. > My advice is use dogs,their nose knows.

    Dogs take cues from the end of the leish. Dont believe you can have an ignorant racist dog?

    Check out the false positives in drug enforcment. First the dog is ‘pointed’ at a suspect (person, car, object) and based on handler body and voice cues (and subtle reward differentials) it does a good job identifying exactly who/what the handler wants ‘probable cause’ to search [or not].

    Dogs are good at many things and because dogs are utterly excellent readers of body language of those they know just aint one of them. It is the leading cause of false positives on one hand and consequently explains why profiling on obvious stuff like “looked asian, middle eastern, black or anything other than like me” (ie: white priviledged) is a crock of shite.

    Passing the buck to ‘the dog, it made the mistake’ is the first mistake…

    Posted by Blair Anderson | November 18, 2010, 5:41 pm
  34. picture your self standing by the grave of your child,mother,daughter,wife, who was killed in a airplane crash. Think how outraged you would be, if you knew that they could have taken steps to prevent this. Perhaps your child, mother, daughter, wife, was on the ground and took hours to die or perhaps the lived but will live in pain for the rest of they’re lives. Flying is not in the bill of rights, it is a choice. The air lines have an obligation to make air travel as safe as possible and take the necessary steps to do so. Don’t like the rules? “Don’t Fly”

    Posted by Kevin | November 20, 2010, 9:33 am
  35. Looks as if my comment got deleted, it didn’t seem like it was some thing that would offend unless you only want to see one side so why?

    re-post:
    Picture your self standing by the grave of your child, mother, daughter or wife, who was killed in an airplane crash. Think how outraged you would be, if you knew that they could have taken steps to prevent this. Perhaps your child, mother, daughter or wife, was on the ground no a passenger, and took hours to die or perhaps the lived but will live in pain for the rest of they’re lives. Flying is not in the Bill of Rights, Air travel is a choice. The air lines have an obligation to make air travel as safe as possible and take the necessary steps to do so. Don’t like the rules? “Don’t Fly”

    Posted by Kevin M | November 22, 2010, 7:33 am
  36. What if I chose to strip off all my clothes, right there at the security checkpoint. They would see what they needed to, and I’d get arrested. This procesure is so invasive, I get angry thinking about it, but I think protesters would get more attention stripping naked than refusing a scan. I would rather stand there naked than allow someone to pat down every inch of my body, or my childs. We teach our children that poeple can not touch them “there” but now its OK?

    Posted by Justthinking | November 22, 2010, 9:15 am
  37. The people that complain about this are the ones that just want something/anything to bitch about. You’re are probably the obnoxious people with the badly behaved kids that I dread to fly with anyway. Please…. do all of us a favor and exercise your right to drive!!

    Posted by Mary | November 22, 2010, 12:57 pm
  38. Alright, first of all, these pictures aren’t being looked at as any type of “pornography”. Its a safety measure. And to be completely honest, who would find those appealing anyways. This isn’t a forced racy photo-shoot. its a scan. The people looking at them aren’t going to care what your body type is, they are looking for any threat to the general public.

    Second of all, last time i checked, riding on an airplane isn’t a right. Its a privilege. These scanners are there for the safety of YOU. If you aren’t carrying a bomb, then what is the matter? These images aren’t permanately saved anyways.

    Im sure as hell everyone would be a little less harsh on these scanners if they saved their lives from a possible threat some day. Body scans are NOT an infringement on anyones rights, but being blown up by someone who made it onto my plane with a bomb is.

    Using an airplane to get somewhere IS NOT A RIGHT, so quit acting like it. Deal with the conditions, or find another way around.

    I dont understand why your not thankful for these things. They could save lives.

    Posted by Shelly | November 23, 2010, 1:51 am
  39. I won’t fly because of things like this. Nor will my fiancee allow me to fly. No one other than him should see anything underneath my clothes and I believe the same for him.

    Sure, flying is a convienence for some people but I think that it’s more of a hassle now. Driving and seeing the countryside is a lot more beautiful and a lot less perverse.

    If people really want a safer country they should only let people fly for work or to fly overseas. But airports won’t do that because they are money hungry and people wouldn’t like it because they are too lazy to drive these days.

    Also, there are human lie detectors and face readers. Hire some people like that to pick possible suspects out from a line. If everyone has to go through these scanners then it’s invasive. If a suspected bomber goes through one then it’s just like an old fashioned suspect pat down.

    And why can’t people go through an x-ray type machine like the baggage does instead of a scanner? If something is in someone’s anus it would show up. I don’t care if someone sees my skeleton, just not my privates and figure. In this technological day and age there should be safe x-ray machines that only reveal skeletal and object images and nothing else.

    Posted by Samantha | November 23, 2010, 2:08 am
  40. A thought experiment. Suppose everyone had the option to be scanned or not. And all those scanned for a given flight would be put on one airplane and those not scanned, put on a different plane. What would you choose? And what if, as you stand in line, you see that there are “suspiciuos” looking people (arabs?) that chose not to be scanned and are assigned to that plane?

    Posted by ybc | November 23, 2010, 9:03 am
  41. If a govt. run prison system is unable to keep drugs out of a prison, and illegal drugs are available in prison. Then why should we believe this will keep terrorists off of a plane?

    Posted by PirateX | November 23, 2010, 4:08 pm
  42. I’m sure that if enough brains got together these machines could be programed to render human flesh invisible when shown on the monitors. But does that really solve the terrorist problem?

    It seems to me that American imperialism is at the root of the problem. How many lives were lost in South East Asia, Latin American countries and the Middle east because of the US meddling in these areas?

    The government’s response to 9/11 was idiotic with more lives of US solders having been lost in Iraq alone than the twin towers attack, not to mention many thousands of innocent Iraqi lives. Remember that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/ll or Al-Qaeda by the way.

    As the current two wars drags on, hatred toward the US increases, sowing seeds for new terrorist recruits.

    The initial hatred for Al-Qaeda seems to have shifted to Muslims as a whole in a growing number of the population in the US, further aggravating the situation.

    So who’s winning this war between the US and Al-Qaeda or who ever it is that the US is suppose to be fighting? If you consider the costs, lost of lives, how long its been since 9/11 and the chaos created, the current debate over the scanners is pretty telling.

    Maybe its time for an approach other than the show of military might. It hasn’t worked till now and I very much doubt it’ll ever work. I only hope that being exposed to scanners doesn’t become the least of the worries.

    Posted by Mel | November 24, 2010, 2:59 pm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: