Nagel   10 #25 Posted October 2, 2010 It's just another thing designed to make air travel as grim and humiliating as possible. I've been through one of these things when they were trialled at Schiphol and the worst part of it isn't anything to do with you're naked image, it's getting bossed around by the operator. You have to stand in a glass cubicle, put your feet spread apart on the footmarks on the floor whilst adopting a spread-eagled position with your arms above your head.  I'd rather take the tiny risk of someone getting on board with a bomb than go through those machines regularly. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
altus   540 #26 Posted October 2, 2010 My previous statement stands. 1. Check the newspaper involved here...  Yep, real serious journalistic integrity... Who's journalistic integrity are you questioning and with what justification? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Karis   11 #27 Posted October 2, 2010 Who's journalistic integrity are you questioning and with what justification?  You're joking, right? This is The Register... who has chosen to 'report' on a story from another online source.  Yep. Absolutely no scaremongering there at all. Just hard-nosed 'journalism'.  It only takes a second to see the kind of articles The Register promotes... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
altus   540 #28 Posted October 2, 2010 You're joking, right? This is The Register... who has chosen to 'report' on a story from another online source. Yep. Absolutely no scaremongering there at all. Just hard-nosed 'journalism'.  It only takes a second to see the kind of articles The Register promotes... The Register might have a irreverent manner and, like all news sources, has some silly stuff but it also has a reputation for hard-nosed journalism when it counts. BT's spying on it's customers web browsing for instance. The Register had more accurate, more in depth and earlier coverage of that than anyone else - including the broadsheets. BTW, the EU has in the last couple of days announced it is taking the UK government to court over its failure to protect UK citizens' privacy partly because of this very issue.  As for quoting another online source, do you treat all online news sources as if they are The Enquirer or do you maybe think The Times, The Telegraph and The Guardian web sites are more reliable? If the latter, what evidence do you have that the allafrica.com site linked to by The Register is not a reliable news source? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Grandad.Malky   11 #29 Posted October 2, 2010 . It only takes a second to see the kind of articles The Register promotes...  Wiki ........ -  The Register frequently uses sarcasm and satire in its articles, in the manner of the British satirical magazine Private Eye, and often provides an iconoclastic stance Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Grandad.Malky   11 #30 Posted October 2, 2010 BT's spying on it's customers web browsing for instance.   What and other providers don’t. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Karis   11 #31 Posted October 2, 2010  As for quoting another online source, do you treat all online news sources as if they are The Enquirer or do you maybe think The Times, The Telegraph and The Guardian web sites are more reliable? If the latter, what evidence do you have that the allafrica.com site linked to by The Register is not a reliable news source?  Seriously. You're joking with this, right...  Let's put things into perspective. You're basing your comments on sensationlist article about Africans getting their "hollies" from the airport scanners...  Clearly, common sense has gone out to lunch... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Alien   10 #32 Posted October 2, 2010 I would really hate anyone of either sex to see me naked on a scanner. If it was male he would be made to feel inadequate and if a lady she would wonder why she never got that lucky.   Thwack! Wake up, yer breakfast's ready. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
[Matt] Â Â 10 #33 Posted October 2, 2010 If you refuse to go through it, they should make you walk or travel by other means. If it reduces threat and puts others` mind at ease, its fine by me. You shouldn`t be thinking of this in a sexual way anyway. Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. - Benjamin Franklin. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Dozy   11 #34 Posted October 3, 2010 This is just a means of getting the public to be submissive but then if you don't mind someone making indecent images of your children in the name of security then you deserve all you get. BTW when was the last time a plane was blown up from inside the cabin?   Under-18s aren't scanned at Manchester.  I can't remember the last time a plane was blown up from inside the cabin - perhaps it hasn't happened recently because security measures prevent terrorists from taking bombs on board?? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Dozy   11 #35 Posted October 3, 2010 It's just another thing designed to make air travel as grim and humiliating as possible. I've been through one of these things when they were trialled at Schiphol and the worst part of it isn't anything to do with you're naked image, it's getting bossed around by the operator. You have to stand in a glass cubicle, put your feet spread apart on the footmarks on the floor whilst adopting a spread-eagled position with your arms above your head. I'd rather take the tiny risk of someone getting on board with a bomb than go through those machines regularly. My bold I wouldn't - and I doubt if most passengers would either.  Why on earth would anybody want to make air travel "as grim and humiliating as possible"? All that would do is put people of flying - which isn't going to benefit anybody.  And I think I'd rather be "bossed around" by the operator (which I would probably see as being told where/how to stand) than being patted down by security, which is what happened to me in Schipol. And I didn't even find that particularly humiliating, or degrading, or whatever, just somewhat disconcerting!  The security guard was very polite and businesslike and explained that there wasn't a problem with the scan, it was just procedure to make the occasional random check. I suppose I could have had a fit of the vapours, and complained about the humiliation, or my human rights being infringed, but I behaved like a sensible, mature person and let her get on it with it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Grandad.Malky   11 #36 Posted October 3, 2010 The security guard was very polite and businesslike and explained that there wasn't a problem with the scan, it was just procedure to make the occasional random check. .  From what I saw last week the only ones being asked to go through the body scanner were those that set off the conventional scanner ( myself being one of them), belt money and watch in the tray but I still had my phone on me which I assume set off the conventional scanner.  My wife walked straight through the conventional scanner and wasn’t stopped as did the vast majority of people, as I said in an earlier post dump everything in the try at the first scanner and you are unlikely to go anywhere near the full body scanner. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...