Full body scans for US bound flights

  • Thread starter Thread starter tmyer2107
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Body Bound
Click For Summary
Amsterdam's Schiphol Airport is implementing full body scans for passengers on US-bound flights, a move that has sparked discussions about privacy and security. While some support the technology for enhancing safety, concerns remain about its potential invasiveness and effectiveness against hidden explosives. The scans will be mandatory, and passengers who refuse will undergo a thorough body search. Critics argue that this measure may not fully address security vulnerabilities, as terrorists could simply choose alternative airports. Overall, the introduction of body scans raises significant questions about balancing safety with personal privacy in air travel.
  • #61
If seeing my crotch area will save us from a terrorist attack, then by george I'll show it!






btw, there are some interesting articles about what Israel does w/o the body scanners and they haven't had an incident in 30 years.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #62
Borek said:
Perhaps we should allow for separate planes for those that don't want to be scanned?

I like this idea.
 
  • #63
mgb_phys said:
The no-fly list is a joke

I worked for a company that developed AI datamining software. Our main business was the OFAC list, a list of foreigners that US companies must not do business with.
The list was a joke put together by a dozen different agencies, there were names of people, vessels and businesses all mixed in.
No standard spelling - we counted more than a dozen different spellings of the Libyan president.
The agencies obviously employed nobody that had ever met an Arab, half the entries had 'Al' or 'Bin' as a first name along with the rest of the name as a surname.

Assuming the airlines are just doing a match (and not using our very expensive software) there is no way anybody on the list with an arabic (or even French) name is going to be matched. The only people inconvenienced by the no fly list is anyone called "John Doe" or "Michael Mouse"

I remember that list. It was sent to us when I worked in database marketing because we were to suppress all of our client's mailings to anyone on the list. It was terrible to work with - sometimes you got complete addresses, sometimes it just gave you cities or countries that were the last known whereabouts.
I remember a bunch of records like: Al Mohammed, Lebanon; Al Mohammed, Paris, France; Al Mohammed, Jordan, etc.
 
  • #64
Crotch checks? That's why I love the Dutch - they are so progressive!

Eventually, I expect the chemical sniffers to win the day.
 
  • #65
mgb_phys said:
Well in the UK it would be Irish people - so anyone Irish on an Aer-lingus or Ryanair flight should get extra screening, it would obviously be a major security risk to have any Irish crew on these planes. In Canada the highest risks would be Sikhs and Quebecois.

In the US apparently Cubans are still the greatest threat according to the recently leaked TSA document.
Quite right.

That is why each society has the right, and obligation, to find out WHICH sub-populations they'll need to focus their attention on.

The trivial fact that such sub-populations will differ from country and country, and from decade to decade has not the slightest relevance here.

Only the incidence level, and degree of over-representation matter.
 
  • #66
arildno said:
Quite right.

That is why each society has the right, and obligation, to find out WHICH sub-populations they'll need to focus their attention on.

The trivial fact that such sub-populations will differ from country and country, and from decade to decade has not the slightest relevance here.

Only the incidence level, and degree of over-representation matter.

Search every middle eastern person that gets on the plane. Because really, what percentage of the airplane is going to be middle eastern, 1-2%? Let the rest of the people have normal random searches. Then you don't clog up the system searching old white ladies or military. I was at the airport and behind me were a bunch of marines. They too, had to take off their watches, shoes, belts, hats, and go through a chemical detection machine and a metal detector. REALLY you think this group of Marines are going to hijack an airplane?

Give-me-a-break. I told the marine "This aint right" when they told him to take his belt off.

(I guess that means I have to search myself when I go flying in my airplane :-p)
 
  • #67
They already have these scanners being trialled in Manchester airport in the UK. You can, however, refuse to go through them, and opt for the usual pat down search. I also heard that Muslim women were exempt from them for "religious reasons"...

Cyrus said:
REALLY you think this group of Marines are going to hijack an airplane?

Didn't you have an incident very recently where a mass murder took place inside an army base?

My understanding of profiling is that everyone is subject to the minimum security, but that some certain subset of the population is required to undergo a more thorough screening.
 
  • #68
cristo said:
They already have these scanners being trialled in Manchester airport in the UK. You can, however, refuse to go through them, and opt for the usual pat down search. I also heard that Muslim women were exempt from them for "religious reasons"...



Didn't you have an incident very recently where a mass murder took place inside an army base?

My understanding of profiling is that everyone is subject to the minimum security, but that some certain subset of the population is required to undergo a more thorough screening.

But that guy was middle eastern (and already deemed to be nuts based on his previous actions. He was a psychiatrist and went to a medical convention and gave a talk about how everyone there were going to hell for being infidels), and should have been screened! :biggrin:

Besides, those marines were white.
 
  • #69
I have a funny/sad story of an American getting onto a "flying list". He visited Amsterdam and promised a friend of him to bring back cigarette-rolling paper with the Amsterdam logo on it, as a souvenir (an innocent present). In a random luggage search they found the paper and asked if he had been doing drugs and they confiscated the paper.

The next time he had to fly he found out that he had been flagged as someone carry drug paraphernalia (!). He immediately had to come along with security personnel, was strip searched and even was asked to bend over. So now every time he flies he is treated as a drug trafficker, because some lame security officer is not able to recognize ordinary cigarette-rolling paper.
 
  • #70
Cyrus said:
I was at the airport and behind me were a bunch of marines. They too, had to take off their watches, shoes, belts, hats, and go through a chemical detection machine and a metal detector. REALLY you think this group of Marines are going to hijack an airplane?

Give-me-a-break. I told the marine "This aint right" when they told him to take his belt off.
Wouldn't it be too easy to dress up as a marine and skip a security check? It is a basic human right to be treated equally, so I think everybody should.
 
  • #71
Cyrus said:
Besides, those marines were white.

And McVeigh was blue?

Last pictures I saw he was orange.
 
  • #72
Monique said:
Wouldn't it be too easy to dress up as a marine and skip a security check? It is a basic human right to be treated equally, so I think everybody should.

As an American, I don't want any more airplanes blowing up or crashing into buildings where I live. I think your idealism is not founded on any form of rationality.
 
  • #73
Borek said:
And McVeigh was blue?

Last pictures I saw he was orange.


How many Muslim terrorists were white?

As a side note: Janet Napolitano was an idiot saying "the system worked." If she thinks that is 'working' she should be fired.
 
  • #74
Cyrus said:
As an American, I don't want any more airplanes blowing up or crashing into buildings where I live. I think your idealism is not founded on any form of rationality.
And as an American you also think that Marines should not have to go through security checks, I don't think your idealism is founded on any form of rationality.

I have a story for you: drug trafficking was a big problem from flights out of the Caribbean. These drug traffickers were usually people who looked like Caribbean people, so what did they do? They started thoroughly screening every person who looked Caribbean. What did the drug traffickers do? They started enlisted tourists to traffic the drugs for them. These people are not stupid.

There are also going to be white American people who are willing to perform terrorist attacks on airplanes. There are white American people who have already performed terrorist attacks out of extremist motives, ignoring that would be stupid. (not to mention the other non-terrorist motives that people could have to hijack airplanes)
 
  • #75
Cyrus said:
How many Muslim terrorists were white?

Not many, perhaps none. But you are making a mistake assuming that Muslims are the only source of danger and that it is so obvious that white Marine can't be a Muslim terrorist. I suppose that's what Monique means and all are equal is not an idealism - she just points to the fact that everyone can be a terrorist and should be treated in exactly the same way.

Edit: she already posted that in the meantime.
 
Last edited:
  • #76
Monique said:
And as an American you also think that Marines should not have to go through security checks, I don't think your idealism is founded on any form of rationality.

Do you think police should go through security checks at airports? Why do you think uniformed marines should be subjected to taking of their shoes, belts, and hats so they can walk through a bomb detecting machine?

I have a story for you: drug trafficking was a big problem from flights out of the Caribbean. These drug traffickers were usually people who looked like Caribbean people, so what did they do? They started thoroughly screening every person who looked Caribbean. What did the drug traffickers do? They started enlisted tourists to traffic the drugs for them. These people are not stupid.

There are also going to be white American people who are willing to perform terrorist attacks on airplanes. There are white American people who have already performed terrorist attacks out of extremist motives, ignoring that would be stupid. (not to mention the other non-terrorist motives that people could have to hijack airplanes)

You are basing this on an extrapolation of exactly zero cases where this happened. This is absurd.
 
  • #77
Borek said:
Not many, perhaps none. But you are making a mistake assuming that Muslims are the only source of danger and that it is so obvious that white Marine can't be a Muslim terrorist. I suppose that's what Monique means and all are equal is not an idealism - she just points to the fact that everyone can be a terrorist and should be treated in exactly the same way.

Edit: she already posted that in the meantime.

White muslim terrorist count: zero. :rolleyes:. Everyone should not be treated the same way. Middle eastern people should be more throughly screened.
 
  • #78
Cyrus said:
Do you think police should go through security checks at airports? Why do you think uniformed marines should be subjected to taking of their shoes, belts, and hats so they can walk through a bomb detecting machine?

Because anyone in marine uniform looks like uniformed marine.

You are basing this on an extrapolation of exactly zero cases where this happened. This is absurd.

Assuming someone may use commercial flight as a flying bomb to destroy building was an absurd before 9/11.

Cyrus said:
Middle eastern people should be more throughly screened.

Which doesn't mean others should be not.
 
  • #79
Borek said:
Because anyone in marine uniform looks like uniformed marine.

You do realize that marines have proper military ID, right? This is a bit of a cartoonish argument here Borek.

Assuming someone may use commercial flight as a flying bomb to destroy building was an absurd before 9/11.

This unrelated fact validates her point...how? (It does not)
 
  • #80
Cyrus said:
White muslim terrorist count: zero. :rolleyes:. Everyone should not be treated the same way. Middle eastern people should be more throughly screened.
http://www.balkanpeace.org/index.php?index=article&articleid=14021"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirsad_Bektašević

And as said, non-muslim white people also perform terrorist attacks: Timothy McVeigh & Terry Nichols, Theodore Kaczynski, Eric Robert Rudolph, Samuel Bowers, Michael Bray, Richard Grint Butler, Robert Edward Chambliss, David Lane.

Or have you been brainwashed to think that the only people who are capable of doing bad things are black Muslims?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #81
Monique said:
http://www.balkanpeace.org/index.php?index=article&articleid=14021"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirsad_Bektašević

And as said, non-muslim white people also perform terrorist attacks: Timothy McVeigh & Terry Nichols, Theodore Kaczynski, Eric Robert Rudolph, Samuel Bowers, Michael Bray, Richard Grint Butler, Robert Edward Chambliss, David Lane.

Or have you been brainwashed to think that the only people who are capable of doing bad things are black Muslims?

Monique, what does a terrorist in serbia have anything to do with what we are talking about? Is this supposed to be more of a stretch of the imagination with irrelevant examples?

Now,...please. Give me a relevant example next time. I don't need to see another link to an unrelated article about McVeigh. This is not making your point.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #82
Cyrus said:
You do realize that marines have proper military ID, right? This is a bit of a cartoonish argument here Borek.
Anyone who is willing can make a fake ID card.

Cyrus said:
Monique, what does a terrorist in serbia have anything to do with what we are talking about? Is this supposed to be more of a stretch of the imagination with irrelevant examples?

Now,...please. Give me a relevant example next time. I don't need to see another link to an unrelated article about McVeigh. This is not making your point.
This person had ties with al-Qaeda in Iraq, you don't think that is relevant?
 
  • #83
Please don't take this the wrong way, but you are incredibly naive. The reality of national security does not allow me to share this view with you.
 
  • #84
Who is naive?
Bektašević allegedly was an Internet recruiter, under the alias Maximus, for young Muslims to join the insurgency in Iraq. According to the British newspaper The Times, citing police and intelligence sources, Bektašević had visited the former leader of al-Qaeda in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, and run one of his web sites. Bektašević also went by the alias Abu Imad As-Sandzaki on various internet forums.

In particular, Islamic radicals are looking to create cells of so-called white al Qaeda, non-Arab members who can evade racial profiling used by police forces to watch for potential terrorists. "They want to look European to carry out operations in Europe," said a Western intelligence agent in Belgrade, the capital of Serbia and Montenegro, adjacent to Bosnia. "It's yet another evolution in the tools used by terrorists."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/30/AR2005113002098.html
 
  • #85
Cyrus said:
You do realize that marines have proper military ID, right? This is a bit of a cartoonish argument here Borek.

This unrelated fact validates her point...how? (It does not)

It doesn't validate Monique's point, it invalidates your point. You seem to be sure that you can base your preventive actions based on past experience. That was done earlier and was not effective. And if you ASSUME that some groups are not suspected for any reason, you can be sure terrorists will try to use it against you.
 
  • #86
Some people are just so pathetic! :mad:...IMO, all should go through the same process equally, if there is any needed.
 
  • #87
First off, OF COURSE discriminatory screening will induce those actually leaning towards terrorism to make themselves more invisible (i.e, to gain a position in the relatively unsupervised group rather than the more supervised group).
This is just a perfectly normal arms race, and there's nothing wrong with that.

HOWEVER, any such added effort the would-be-terrorist must make in order not to get busted is a COST for him, one way or the other.

By always following a "one-step-behind" policy (it is impossible for the government to be one or more steps ahead) towards these perpetrators, the perps will enter the diminishing-returns-zone, where the increased costliness necessary to remain effective will become a barrier to their plans to begin with.
I.e, the number of attempts that will be successful, ALONG with the number of attempts tried will plummet/be significantly reduced, until we reach what we could call the "acceptable risk"-zone.


Secondly, let us say that the average time for a full body scan of any passenger is half a minute.
For a domestic flight with 300 passengers, at least 150 minutes, i.e, 2 and a half HOURS of screening time will be needed to scan everyone. If 20 minutes of total security delay is acceptable, this will require the installation of about 8 or 9 scanning devices and a similar number of separate operating crews on every airport that is an initial take-off site for such planes.

Of course, this is WAY too expensive, and at the very least, something that cannot be installed overnight, or even within a year or so.

What is, therefore, the necessary result?
SAMPLING PROCEDURES of passengers to be scanned WILL develop, whether we like it or not!

Since, in the given example, a 10% sampling pool will suffice for a single scanning device in order to be within the 20 minute delay, the only rational thing to do is to pick that 10% on basis of characteristics well-known to have within their midst a gross over-representation of terrorists, rather than picking our sampling pool out of a confused, irreflective policy, which is precisely what we would get if you, for example, left the criteria for sampling up to thousands of half-educated airport personnel.


That terrorists then will gradually shift their characteristics away from the initial sampling criteria should be expected but should merely result in a requirement of continuous monitoring, and a willingness to change the sampling criteria as the situation evolves.
 
Last edited:
  • #88
drizzle said:
Some people are just so pathetic! :mad:...IMO, all should go through the same process equally, if there is any needed.

Why?
 
  • #89
Borek said:
It doesn't validate Monique's point, it invalidates your point. You seem to be sure that you can base your preventive actions based on past experience. That was done earlier and was not effective. And if you ASSUME that some groups are not suspected for any reason, you can be sure terrorists will try to use it against you.

I'm not going to argue in hyperbole with you.
 
  • #90
Cyrus said:
Why?

Why for what? for being pathetic or for being treated equally as others?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
864
  • Poll Poll
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 69 ·
3
Replies
69
Views
10K
Replies
18
Views
17K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
10K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
Replies
64
Views
17K