body scanners and pat downs

[Neognosis]

And, yes, I will answer honestly...if I would pose in front of a camera nude for money...I just might. But, it would be my decision, on my terms and wouldn't be forced on me by a government that was supposed to be protecting my civil rights.

Sorry, once again, this isn't a violation of any of your civil rights because you don't have to fly, flying is not a right. you are flying voluntarily. Flying is not a civil right. It is a voluntary activity. It is your decision to fly, on your terms, not imposed by the government.

If you are emotional enough to think that a body scan is the equivalent of a colletible nude picture in which you can be indentified, and that bothers you so much, then you probably should not fly then.

The same way I have a choice to not go see a concert before which I'm going to be patted down.

Some of the arguments here have left earth and are not in the stratosphere as emotional people get themselves more and more worked up. We're seeing atypical stories presented as typical, chock full of exaggeration. And we've even seen "nazi" bandied about, as well as a blanket accustaion of all tsaa staff as being perverts who sought out a job where they get to look at "naked pictures" of people and touch other people.

this is the typical pattern of fear and paranoia.

If you don't like the proceedure, then you should write to your representative and the TSAA and the airlines. But I think what you'll find is that the TSAA proceedure is relatively non invasive, and what you are posting as typical situations are highly publicized but rare incidents.

It's very funny that, in your emotional bravado, you say you'll go to the airport in a bikini, thus showing much more than a body scan does, because you will be identified and your face will be easily recognized. Something not typical with a body scan.

Edited November 18, 2010 by Neognosis

[Leah G.]

If they do one, they should do all. Don't stop because of religious beliefs. Even musliums without hesitation. The people in bulky clothes that refuse should be strip searched. I'm all for profiling too. There is nothing wrong with it. We all do it everyday, if you wear a suit and there are two groups of people waiting for a bus or a train and there is a choice of waiting next to the people in suits or the people wearing gang clothes, which would you choose? That's profiling too.

[+OverSword]

Sorry, once again, this isn't a violation of any of your civil rights because you don't have to fly, flying is not a right. you are flying voluntarily. Flying is not a civil right. It is a voluntary activity. It is your decision to fly, on your terms, not imposed by the government.

If you are emotional enough to think that a body scan is the equivalent of a colletible nude picture in which you can be indentified, and that bothers you so much, then you probably should not fly then.

The same way I have a choice to not go see a concert before which I'm going to be patted down.

Some of the arguments here have left earth and are not in the stratosphere as emotional people get themselves more and more worked up. We're seeing atypical stories presented as typical, chock full of exaggeration. And we've even seen "nazi" bandied about, as well as a blanket accustaion of all tsaa staff as being perverts who sought out a job where they get to look at "naked pictures" of people and touch other people.

this is the typical pattern of fear and paranoia.

If you don't like the proceedure, then you should write to your representative and the TSAA and the airlines. But I think what you'll find is that the TSAA proceedure is relatively non invasive, and what you are posting as typical situations are highly publicized but rare incidents.

It's very funny that, in your emotional bravado, you say you'll go to the airport in a bikini, thus showing much more than a body scan does, because you will be identified and your face will be easily recognized. Something not typical with a body scan.

Really? I had no idea this is your opinion, despite the fact that you have repeated it 500 times on this thread.

Edited November 18, 2010 by OverSword

[Michelle]

Sorry, once again, this isn't a violation of any of your civil rights because you don't have to fly, flying is not a right. you are flying voluntarily. Flying is not a civil right. It is a voluntary activity. It is your decision to fly, on your terms, not imposed by the government.

If you are emotional enough to think that a body scan is the equivalent of a colletible nude picture in which you can be indentified, and that bothers you so much, then you probably should not fly then.

The same way I have a choice to not go see a concert before which I'm going to be patted down.

Some of the arguments here have left earth and are not in the stratosphere as emotional people get themselves more and more worked up. We're seeing atypical stories presented as typical, chock full of exaggeration. And we've even seen "nazi" bandied about, as well as a blanket accustaion of all tsaa staff as being perverts who sought out a job where they get to look at "naked pictures" of people and touch other people.

this is the typical pattern of fear and paranoia.

If you don't like the proceedure, then you should write to your representative and the TSAA and the airlines. But I think what you'll find is that the TSAA proceedure is relatively non invasive, and what you are posting as typical situations are highly publicized but rare incidents.

It's very funny that, in your emotional bravado, you say you'll go to the airport in a bikini, thus showing much more than a body scan does, because you will be identified and your face will be easily recognized. Something not typical with a body scan.

You are in denial. This is the new policy of the TSA...not exaggeration...straight from the horses mouth.

http://www.latimes.com/news/la-na-tsa-pat-downs-20101118,0,2856942.story?track=rss

By Brian Bennett and Jordan Steffen, Tribune Washington Bureau

November 17, 2010|5:32 p.m.

The head of the Transportation Security Administration refused to back down from using aggressive pat-downs and full-body scans at airports, telling a Senate committee on Wednesday that the screenings were necessary to protect the nation's fliers.

TSA Director John Pistole said the pat-downs, which include searches of passengers' genital areas, and scanners that reveal nude images of their bodies would have found the explosives on an alleged would-be airline bomber last Christmas Day. Umar Abdulmutallab is accused of boarding a flight bound for Detroit with explosives in his underwear that went undetected by metal detectors.

Pistole told the Senate Commerce Committee that the Detroit attempt prompted the TSA to develop the new procedures, but their gradual phase-in was accelerated after the Yemen package bomb plot last month.

A week before the Thanksgiving travel crush, some passengers and pilots have complained that the searches — particularly the pat-downs — are too invasive.

"I wouldn't want my wife to be touched in a way that these folks are being touched. I wouldn't want to be touched that way. And I think that we have to be focused on safety, but there's a balance," said Republican Sen. George LeMieux of Florida. "I think we've gone to right field."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Interestingly enough, the House voted to prohibit use of the scanners, but the TSA went ahead with it.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34614797/ns/travel-news

House votes to prohibit use

Last June, however, because of privacy concerns, the House voted 310-118 to prohibit the use of whole-body imaging for primary screening. The measure, still pending in the Senate, would limit the use of the devices to secondary screening.

"As a society, we're going to have to figure out the balance between personal privacy and the need to secure an aircraft," said Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, who sponsored the measure. "And there is no easy answer."

'Virtual strip searches'

Jay Stanley, public education director for the American Civil Liberties Union's Technology and Liberty Program, said the machines essentially perform "virtual strip searches that see through your clothing and reveal the size and shape of your body."

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Even pilots are rebeling against the new procedures.

http://abcnews.go.com/Travel/major-pilots-unions-rebel-tsa-screening-rules-urge/story?id=12100247&page=2

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You don't seem to be getting the point. I'm not modest, parading around in a bikini where everyone can see me isn't an issue. It's the principle of it. Regardless of the reasons someone may have for traveling by plane, we should not have to be subjected to a virtual strip search and/or having them check anyones genital area...which is now standard procedure. And you can bet your last dollar that I have been and will continue to contact anyone I need to to get this stopped.

[Michelle]

And which flight and airport will this be at?

Keep an eye on Atlanta.

[MissMelsWell]

Neogenesis... you haven't been listening or reading... this is NOT NOT I reapeat the SAME as a concert pat down, if it were, you probably wouldn't hear too much about it from me. THat's a lift your shirt, twirl around and let me check to see if you have Jack Daniels taped to your leg..

The TSA "pat down" is actually a full police style groping except the person being grabbed and prodded has done NOTHING wrong and isn't suspected of anything.

They fully palm women's breasts, some TSA pervert is going to grab up between your legs and essentially check your good old boys, they are jamming their hands down INTO your pants! This i NOT a concert pat down. This is more like the full frisking you're gonna get from a cop if you'd just been ARRESTED. If security at a concert were to conduct the same kind of "pat" down the TSA is doing starting this week... the sercurity at the concert venue would be arrested and jailed for sexual assult.

You keep deluding yourself dude.... Go right on ahead until some TSA dude reaches up and grabs your INNOCENT not suspected of ANYTHING,. 4 year old's junk or cops a full palm feel on your wifes breasts. You might like it when strange men put their hands you YOUR pants, but I can assure you the vast majority of people want nothing ot do with it and would rather have the old security measures back (remember, THOSE WORKED).

Edited November 18, 2010 by MissMelsWell

[zenfahr]

where does it stop then? if its not a right to fly or drive... well then its not your right to shop at the mall, or wal-mart. Whats to stop them from doing searches as well. Lucky that it is your right to an education, since Im sure they would want to instill this in schools as well.

[Leah G.]

where does it stop then? if its not a right to fly or drive... well then its not your right to shop at the mall, or wal-mart. Whats to stop them from doing searches as well. Lucky that it is your right to an education, since Im sure they would want to instill this in schools as well.

Your absolutally right, where does it stop? It should stop here and now. This shouldn't happen. If they could profile, it wouldn't happen and we would be safer. There will always be exceptions to the rule, people that blow up planes will get threw. They are making exceptions for musliums in bulky clothes and you don't think that's dangerous?? Everything this government has been doing lately seems so against the people and for the people we are at war with. It's gotten goofy.

[+OverSword]

The TSA should be required to post on thier web-site every terror event they have prevented since thier inception. I already know the number is zero.

[+OverSword]

The only thing that makes sense is to let airlines provide thier own security. They have billions of dollars riding on the safety and faith of thier passengers and history has shown time and again that private enterprise does better at EVERY job than the government.

[DontHate]

Sorry, once again, this isn't a violation of any of your civil rights because you don't have to fly, flying is not a right. you are flying voluntarily. Flying is not a civil right. It is a voluntary activity. It is your decision to fly, on your terms, not imposed by the government.

I'm well aware that flying much like driving is a privilege and not an inherent right, that said you and your vehicle are free from unlawful search and seizure unless there is probable cause. Where is the probable cause for the TSA? Are we guilty until proven innocent?

[Michelle]

Backlash grows against full-body scanners in airports

Opposition to new full-body imaging machines to screen passengers and the government's deployment of them at most major airports is growing.

Many frequent fliers complain they're time-consuming or invade their privacy. The world's airlines say they shouldn't be used for primary security screening. And questions are being raised about possible effects on passengers' health.

"The system takes three to five times as long as walking through a metal detector," says Phil Bush of Atlanta, one of many fliers on USA TODAY's Road Warriors panel who oppose the machines. "This looks to be yet another disaster waiting to happen."

BODY SCANNERS: Concerns about privacy and health set off debate

The machines dubbed by some fliers as virtual strip searches were installed at many airports in March after a Christmas Day airline bombing attempt. The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) has spent more than $80 million for about 500 machines, including 133 now at airports. It plans to install about 1,000 by the end of next year.

The machines are running into complaints and questions here and overseas:

The International Air Transport Association, which represents 250 of the world's airlines, including major U.S. carriers, says the TSA lacks "a strategy and a vision" of how the machines fit into a comprehensive checkpoint security plan. "The TSA is putting the cart before the horse," association spokesman Steve Lott says.

Security officials in Dubai said this month they wouldn't use the machines because they violate "personal privacy," and information about their "side effects" on health isn't known.

Last month, the European Commission said in a report that "a rigorous scientific assessment" of potential health risks is needed before machines are deployed there. It also said screening methods besides the new machines should be used on pregnant women, babies, children and people with disabilities.

The U.S. Government Accountability Office said in October that the TSA was deploying the machines without fully testing them and assessing whether they could detect "threat items" concealed on various parts of the body. And in March, the office said it "remains unclear" whether they would have detected the explosives that police allege Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab tried to detonate on a jet bound for Detroit on Christmas.

cont...

http://travel.usatoday.com/flights/2010-07-13-1Abodyscans13_ST_N.htm

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Right now it would still be fairly easy to fly using airports that don't have the scanners, but you would then be subjected to the invasive pat-downs.

Edited November 18, 2010 by Michelle

[MissMelsWell]

Yep, I know after talking to a few pilot friend the last couple of days.. they're p***ED about all this, and one is considering quitting. And he's not only a passenger airline pilot, but also a reservist pilot for the Air Force who has been flying missions in Afghanistan as recently as JULY!. If he thinks this is overkill, I believe him. He's literally on the front lines in more ways than one. I hope he quits and takes it to the news stations. But being he's rather stoic and duty oriented, I doubt he will. He'll just quietly quit the airlines I'm guessing.

[MissMelsWell]

Right now it would still be fairly easy to fly using airports that don't have the scanners, but you would then be subjected to the invasive pat-downs.

Not for me... We only have one airport on the whole western side of the state and the next nearest airport is Portland International (a 3.5 hour drive) which has scanners also. I'd have to go to Spokane or Boise I believe, both of which are a 5 hour drive in good weather. In the winter, you're lucky if you can make it over the mountain passes to either town in 8 hours. *sigh* I have no choice. The next nearest International Airport is San Francisco which is 800 miles away. There's also Vancouver BC International about 3.5 hours away... but that's got it's own issues when it comes to traveling.

Edited November 18, 2010 by MissMelsWell

[Leah G.]

Good luck Miss and becareful. I used to fly quite a bit but I won't anymore and I don't have to! I'm sorry it sounds like you do. I'd get arrested if I did. I've got a big mouth and a firery temper, quick but I get over it quick too. Do some meditation or something before you go and deep breathing is always good. Imagine your in a happy place and don't let them suck the fun out of your trip.

Best regards.

[Michelle]

Not for me... We only have one airport on the whole western side of the state and the next nearest airport is Portland International (a 3.5 hour drive) which has scanners also. I'd have to go to Spokane or Boise I believe, both of which are a 5 hour drive in good weather. In the winter, you're lucky if you can make it over the mountain passes to either town in 8 hours. *sigh* I have no choice. The next nearest International Airport is San Francisco which is 800 miles away. There's also Vancouver BC International about 3.5 hours away... but that's got it's own issues when it comes to traveling.

That's brutal. I'm lucky my town has a small airport, it only has six gates, and if there isn't a direct flight I can make connections in various locations. I'm hoping this situation has been rectified before my next trip.

[rashore]

Wow, this one has gone pages since I last looked at it, lol.

I thought it was funny that a while back someone posted the notion that most of us would be willing to take pay to get imaged nakie, yet are unwilling to do it for security. Why did I find it funny? Because I have in my youth been a calendar girl and an artists model, and I did get paid for it. Scantily clad, semi-nude, and illusion nude. But I never allowed full view action of my private bits, and if it was required, I wouldn't take the job. And in that light, if the TSA wants to take that graphic of an image of me, they better be prepared to pay me real well if they are going to try to force me to have images taken of myself or be touched by another in a way that I never allowed artists to no matter what the pay. And it for sure not because I'm body conscious.

It's because no means no when it concerns access to my private bits, and I don't give a eff what the excuse is for wanting that access. I don't care that some chick could be hiding a bomb in her boob flap, or some guy might have something more than his bits tucked under. Those are not good excuses to image or touch me in places where my saying no should be the golden law. It may not be a civil right to not have people access your privates that you don't want having access them, but it should damn well be considered a human right.

The privilege to fly. Yeah, that isn't a right in itself. But it shouldn't be a privilege bought at the cost of giving up the right to say no to a choice between being imaged graphically or touched in intimate places. It shouldn't be a privilege that can make one face the choice of having a job or not because the employer will send them out on flights. It shouldn't be a privilege that requires our children to be graphically imaged, or intimately touched, or see people wandering around in scantly clad protest, or having to wander around scantily clad to hopefully pass through without being chosen.

I understand the need for strong and consistent security measures. In these pages there have been several wonderful options already being utilized. I would not mind in the least if all those measures were stepped up to be able to give up the graphic scanning and touching. Give up the expensive graphic scanner that has one guy looking at fairly nakie people all day, and use those funds to bring on a few more K-9 units to patrol around.

May sound odd, but in a check station, I would find it less offensive and invasive to have a dog stuff it's nose my groin than a human feeling or looking around to see if there's anything there that's not supposed to be.

[MissMelsWell]

I agree rashore, 110% agree and then some.

And, hahaha, I expect your profile views to shoot straight up as these little horn dogs go to see if you have a picture on your profie. LOL.

Edited November 19, 2010 by MissMelsWell

[THE MATRIX]

I'm truly amazed how people are screaming bloody murder about body scanners and pat downs being an invasion of privacy yet act like its nothing for things like warrant less wiretaps and the Patriot Act.

Edited November 19, 2010 by THE MATRIX

[Sakari]

What is more " revealing" ? .......... Not sure about anyone else , but if I saw the Scanner picture anywhere , I sure the hell would not be able to make out who it is....

Edited November 19, 2010 by Sakari

[Euphorbia]

What is more " revealing" ? .......... Not sure about anyone else , but if I saw the Scanner picture anywhere , I sure the hell would not be able to make out who it is....

These women have complete control of how much skin to show, when to show it, where to show it, and have the ability to cover up whenever they feel like it. At the airport, not so much...

Have you seen the inverted photos?

[Sakari]

Have you seen the inverted photos?

Please tell me , you , and everyone here knows those inverted photos are FAKE !!!!!!!!!!

As I stated earlier , the only thing I do not get , is what the biog deal is of going through that scanner....The picture above is the accurate picture of these , and they do are not " saved" in a hard drive , nor posted on the internet , even if they were , what can anyone see out of them?....There is no possible way to see who it is....

And yes , women and men can choose to dress that way at the beach , and at Night Clubs , that is why I really do not get this , dress like that in public , easily recognised , and cry about these scans?

Everyone has their opinion on it , and that is how it should be , but I hope people are not basing them off of those fake inverted pictures that have been floating around......

[Varelse]

I'm truly amazed how people are screaming bloody murder about body scanners and pat downs being an invasion of privacy yet act like its nothing for things like warrant less wiretaps and the Patriot Act.

Me too. In fact Iirc, the patriot act changed the rights to privacy we had in this country on many levels. It disgusts me but we let it happen like a frog in water slowly brought to boil.

Simply purchasing a plane ticket forfeits many rights to privacy we take for granted. It says we are entering onto a contract that we must abide by in order for said contract to be executed. If the purchasing party doesn't choose to abide by those terms they can lose their ticket to fly and have no refund or recourse.

THAT being said, it's plainly obvious to me that airport security in the US has officially jumped the shark. Since its still impossible to cover all the bases (like body cavities for starters) I think the terrorists, whether they're muslim or ultra libertarians, will now strike a passanger jet just to prove they still can.

[Euphorbia]

Please tell me , you , and everyone here knows those inverted photos are FAKE !!!!!!!!!!

Do you have proof of this?

As I stated earlier , the only thing I do not get , is what the biog deal is of going through that scanner....The picture above is the accurate picture of these , and they do are not " saved" in a hard drive , nor posted on the internet , even if they were , what can anyone see out of them?....There is no possible way to see who it is....

Not saved? That's an absolute lie! How do you think all the pictures got leaked to the internet?

And yes , women and men can choose to dress that way at the beach , and at Night Clubs , that is why I really do not get this , dress like that in public , easily recognised , and cry about these scans?

Choosing to wear something revealing is different than being forced into a virtual strip search!

Everyone has their opinion on it , and that is how it should be , but I hope people are not basing them off of those fake inverted pictures that have been floating around......

Again, prove they are fake!

[Euphorbia]

Sakari,

The Pussification of America is OUT OF CONTROL !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You seem to like this phrase.

Yet you and those like you seem to be afraid to get on a plane without being fondled and/or virtually strip searched.

You've given in to fear...