Full body scans for US bound flights

[tmyer2107]

http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/europe/12/30/airline.terror.schiphol/index.html"

Amsterdam's Schiphol Airport will start using full body scans for US bound flights. I remember seeing this technology in its early stages a few years ago and remember the privacy issues. I am glad to see it actually going into use. I think they should have it at all airports and use it at random, kind of like the pre-boarding searches. The people that are agaisnt it because of the privacy issues would be very unhappy if all the airports suddenly switched to this technology, the random searches would be a good starting point. I am all for every airport using it. I value my safety more than my privacy.

 

[mheslep]

http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/europe/12/30/airline.terror.schiphol/index.html"

Amsterdam's Schiphol Airport will start using full body scans for US bound flights. I remember seeing this technology in its early stages a few years ago and remember the privacy issues. I am glad to see it actually going into use. I think they should have it at all airports and use it at random, kind of like the pre-boarding searches. The people that are agaisnt it because of the privacy issues would be very unhappy if all the airports suddenly switched to this technology, the random searches would be a good starting point. I am all for every airport using it.

It may be necessary, but I am not 'glad' that this is so.

I value my safety more than my privacy.

Keep up that policy for too long and we may end up loosing both.

 

[lisab]

Great, so now underwear bombers know to fly out of Paris or London instead of Amsterdam .

 

[tmyer2107]

Keep up that policy for too long and we may end up loosing both.

True, I should have been more precise in my statement. I don't want this discussion to spin off into privacy issues related to the patriot act, etc. I just don't mind going through a full body scanner in an airport. It is clear that the explosives the terrorists are going to use will not be picked up by our current methods.

 

[jtbell]

The ultimate solution: eliminate all carry-on baggage, make all airline passengers check in all their baggage and clothing, and fly in the nude.

 

[lisab]

The ultimate solution: eliminate all carry-on baggage, make all airline passengers check in all their baggage and clothing, and fly in the nude.

...because getting stuck in a middle seat between two fully-clothed large people isn't bad enough.

 

[Astronuc]

The ultimate solution: eliminate all carry-on baggage, make all airline passengers check in all their baggage and clothing, and fly in the nude.

That still leaves the possibility of using implanted or internal explosives.

What we need is incorporeal transportation.

As the Moody Blues sang "See with your mind, leave your body behind" (from Sun Is Still Shining, To Our Children's Children's Children)

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

Will they scan children?

 

[tmyer2107]

Will they scan children?

Thats a good question. I'm assuming the answer is yes since it says all passengers will be scanned.

 

[Monique]

.. in addition all passengers will be thoroughly padded down by security personnel. I find a body search more intrusive than a scan that is only judged by computer software.

 

[Astronuc]

From the article

The millimeter-wave body scanners will be in place in about three weeks, Dutch Interior Minister Guusje ter Horst told a news conference at The Hague.


The scanners will be permanent at Schiphol, and any passengers bound for the United States who do not go through them will be bodysearched, ter Horst said.

mm-wave implier IR, i.e. thermal imaging, which perhaps is passive, as opposed to active/invasive scanning, e.g., x-ray or neutron radiography.

 

[Monique]

I misread, the coming three weeks all passengers will be bodysearched (including the crotch, so be warned ), after that everyone will go through the scan.

 

[Astronuc]

I have nothing to hide!

or nothing but hide. :rofl:

 

[Borek]

Perhaps we should allow for separate planes for those that don't want to be scanned?

 

[f95toli]

mm-wave implier IR, i.e. thermal imaging, which perhaps is passive, as opposed to active/invasive scanning, e.g., x-ray or neutron radiography.

No, the systems are probably active (there is a radiation source). Most of them are based around far-IR (a few THz) so it is not really thermal imaging in the usual sense.
And no, they will not detect explosives, it is basically a camera that can see through most fabrics but it is till possible to hide explosives.
There are techniques for spectroscopy in the THz range that can detect the "fingerprint" of some explosives but they are still being developed and won't be ready for deployment for a number of years,

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

(including the crotch, so be warned )

depending on the agent, I may opt to go through security a few times just to be sure!

 

[Mech_Engineer]

I'm not sure that a THz scan is any more intrusive from a privacy standpoint than X-ray scans of your luggage, or asking for your personal information when you buy the ticket, or randomly searching your luggage.

So the agents see you "nude," do we really have to be so prude about it?

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

So the agents see you "nude," do we really have to be so prude about it?

I wouldn't want an agent looking at my 6 year old daughter or son!

 

[Mech_Engineer]

Perhaps, but is that because you feel they are possible sex offenders or something? WHY don't you want an official looking at your child with a THz machine?

I've actually flown through Schiphol, and more intrusive than these proposed body scans is the pre-boarding interview I had to go through where a security agent asks you questions about where you're coming from, where you're going, why you're going there, how long you plan to stay, etc. Granted this was a while ago (2004) but I couldn't help but feel like I had be careful about what I divulged to the agent...

 

[mheslep]

True, I should have been more precise in my statement. I don't want this discussion to spin off into privacy issues related to the patriot act, etc.

How can thread on full body scans not involved privacy issues?

 

[mheslep]

I'm not sure that a THz scan is any more intrusive from a privacy standpoint than X-ray scans of your luggage, or asking for your personal information when you buy the ticket, or randomly searching your luggage.

Of course it is

So the agents see you "nude," do we really have to be so prude about it?

I predict those mm wave photos will, for famous travellers, begin appearing on the web, a gross privacy violation. There is just too much lurid value placed on such to avoid it.

For every grandmother subjected to this intrusive scan or disallowed a carry on or restricted from moving in the last hour of the flight, ten thousand young males from Nigeria or Arab young male traveling with no return ticket and no checked bags from the middle east should be body searched first, and then we can discuss prudishness about profiling.

 

[turbo]

Will they scan children?

It's likely.

Years back, I was on a flight out of Bangor and there was a young couple behind me with a baby in a carrier. They acted a bit flustered and rushed, hunting for "misplaced" boarding passes, etc, and passing the baby back and forth. The man had already gone through the metal detector and his wife passed the baby (in the carrier) to him so she could rummage through her purse. Luckily, the security lady manning the X-ray machine had enough brains to have seen a violation of procedure, and she insisted that the man take the baby out of the carrier and hand it back to his wife, who allowed it to be put through the X-ray. Suddenly, a supervisor appeared out of nowhere, and the lady had him look at the X-ray display - she didn't shield the screen very well and I had gotten around to where I could clearly see the shape of a gun. The man and woman went off with the supervisor and a couple of security guards, and soon after, they boarded the flight - I assumed they were air marshals, testing security.

Babies, toddlers, etc can be very useful distractions.

 

[Monique]

There are also lots of things that you can hide in diapers.

I wonder how the scans react to jewelry and buttons/zippers? Will it cause the scans to be flagged for human inspection? (which would be pretty much the case for every person)

 

[dr dodge]

this is (one reason) why I will NEVER fly anymore
bio cards managed by the credit companies
aircraft maintainence done "out of country"
breaking of most professional unions.

the "puffer" can detect not only explosives, hydrocarbons, narcotics, but ANYTHING you want to program into it. If you shoot fireworks off with your kids sunday nite, you will test positive monday morning, regardless of scrubbing.

if the road don't get there, I ain't goin'
(after 13 years of travel I actually have anxiety attacks on the plane now)
what did me in was staring at a loose bolt on the wing in the slipstream for 3 1/2 hours then telling the crew and being told ok sir we'll fix it
yea right...ya didn't even ask which bolt!

dr

 

[mgb_phys]

Will they start checking airside ground crew?
So they do THz full body imaging of every passenger, take butter knives off pilots (and confiscate sharp pointy medals from generals)
And yet they allow trucks from catering, fueling, freight companies to drive in with only a cursory check of an ID card.

 

[tmyer2107]

How can thread on full body scans not involved privacy issues?

It does involve privacy issues. My point was just that I wanted the thread to stay focused on the privacy issues related to the body scans alone, not spin off to a thread about privacy vs security in other areas including the patriot act.

 

[Monique]

Will they start checking airside ground crew?
So they do THz full body imaging of every passenger, take butter knives off pilots (and confiscate sharp pointy medals from generals)
And yet they allow trucks from catering, fueling, freight companies to drive in with only a cursory check of an ID card.

A Dutch journalist was able to go in and out of the airport on a fake ID card. He was able to bring a fake bomb and was even able to enter the airplane of the Queen, which was parked in one of the hangars for servicing. This means that the security for the outside personnel has been tightened.

I think the weakest point is that the US is not concerned about its inland air traffic. It is the countries that fly passengers into the US that are required to up the security, which means that only those countries need to invest a lot of money. People with ill intend will find another airport from which to fly, this definitely is not a watertight measure.

 

[dr dodge]

I flew out of Curacao twice.
the "metal detector" was a very nice wood fake complete with power chord
would never have known the difference, except the fake readout sticker on the top was peeling, and the "lights" never changed
overseas and Canadian security is a joke

dr

 

[Monique]

overseas and Canadian security is a joke

dr

Isn't that a gross prejudice/simplification

I probably shouldn't even bite, but it was interesting that I've had security booths go off in Italian airports, while the ones in the States remained quiet. It turned out that there was metal in my shoe soles.

 

[arildno]

As long as one doesn't let reality make a pre-selection of targets that should be fully scanned, this will be an extermely costly, and worthless effort.

We all KNOW which sub-population SHOULD be singled out as the most likely source of terrorists, and hence, which it is entirely appropriate to burden with discriminatory rules regarding safety regulations.

 

[dr dodge]

I had better keep my mouth shut
I am sorry if I offended anyone from other countries, I didn't mean to
I have traveled a lot and think that we could improve both the process and the experience
traveling shouldn't make you feel like a criminal, or nameless piece of meat, no matter what safety stuff you must go thru
(and no, I am not the guy that pitches a hissy fit for holding up my underware in public)

dr

 

[mgb_phys]

A Dutch journalist was able to go in and out of the airport on a fake ID card. He was able to bring a fake bomb and was even able to enter the airplane of the Queen, which was parked in one of the hangars for servicing. This means that the security for the outside personnel has been tightened.

But do they put every meal cart through an X-ray, dismantle every fuel truck and search every driver.
If not - the easiest way to put a bomb on a plane is to get someone employed at a service company.

You don't even need a fake ID, since the catering an handling companies pay minimum wage they innevitably end up employing a large number of illegal immigrants, and although they are supposed to do background checks they will hire anybody willing to take the job and hand out id.
There was a similar case in the UK, the RAF base that the Queen's flight operates from had privatized the security to some local mall-cops outfit. A large proportion of their vetted and background checked security guards were illegal immigrants.

 

[Mech_Engineer]

Of course it is

That's not an effective argument. WHY is a THz scan of your body any more of a privacy violation than seraching your bags (including X-Rays), or physical searches? It seems to me that a THz scan is at most as intrusive as a strip search or a physical search of my bags...

I predict those mm wave photos will, for famous travellers, begin appearing on the web, a gross privacy violation. There is just too much lurid value placed on such to avoid it.

I have trouble believing that, I haven't seen X-rays of any famous celebrity's bags yet, why would we assume the data from a THz machine will be leaked? More importantly, should we really not use THz scans because a few celebrities' "naked" pictures show up on the internet? Wouldn't you think that if a celebrity had an ebarassing item of some description in their bag, an X-ray of that bag would be at risk of being leaked to the paparazzi? As it is famous travelers take privately chartered aircraft and don't usually take the large airlines...

[I put "naked" in quotes by the way, because they aren't >really< naked pictures, it does show a person's overall body shape, but it really doesn't tell you much more than a form-fitting dress does...]

ten thousand young males from Nigeria or Arab young male traveling with no return ticket and no checked bags from the middle east should be body searched first, and then we can discuss prudishness about profiling.

You're right that the TSA (and the world in general) probably needs to do a better job of intelligence comparison and collection. Unfortunately I'll bet it isn't as simple as looking for a guy with a one-way ticket and no checked bags...

We are living a society where there is 0.000% tolerance for deaths from terrorism, but around 40,000 people die each year in traffic accidents and more than 15,000 people are killed in murders in the United States alone. All of this makes me wonder where a common-sense approach to risk mitigation is in our society... It is well-known fact that you take a MUCH bigger risk driving to the airport than flying on the airplane.

 

[drankin]

Why stop at scans? Cavity search them all!

Craziness.

 

[Newai]

As long as one doesn't let reality make a pre-selection of targets that should be fully scanned, this will be an extermely costly, and worthless effort.

We all KNOW which sub-population SHOULD be singled out as the most likely source of terrorists, and hence, which it is entirely appropriate to burden with discriminatory rules regarding safety regulations.

Should we go that direction, can you assure us that that sub-population will not have an increase in tensions where they are already feeling the heat from the general public, and thus an increase in violent incidents?