54 1 min 13 yrs

Ok then, hands up WHO out there favours full body scanning at Airports in order to try and prevent further Jihad attacks such as that aborted over Detroit?

Not me.

Why? I object to MY privacy being violated just because the political elite and their minions lack the guts to use intelligent profiling with Muslims being singled out for extra attention. I have no objection to the technology in principle but why should be suffer further indignity and hassle just to spare the blushes of Muslims? Furthermore, I bet the determined Jihadist will find ways around it and the thought of the elderly and young being body scanned rather than young Muslim males – say between 20-40 – is an outrage. We shouldn’t let our dhimmified elite push this one through.

Click to rate this post!
[Total: 0 Average: 0]

54 thoughts on “FULL BODY SCANNING?

  1. I do.

    If we insist on the full body naked scanners to be implimented. It may actually force the politicians to allow the security agencies to profile.

    Profiling works it is not used for PC reason. Well good then walk pass this screen please so we can take naked pix of you.

    That’s the choice

  2. ..and the thought of the elderly and young being body scanned rather than young Muslim males …

    Why would young Muslim males be excluded ?. Who on earth is suggesting that everyone would be searched EXCEPT Muslims ?

  3. An absurd idea and wholly pointless for security.

    The push for these contraptions tells us two things: that the manufacturers are buying politicians and that politicians still think the people they apparently serve are cattle to be pushed, prodded, photographed, searched, recorded, DNAd and now wholly humiliated – all for our own good of course.

  4. Colm –

    Already the MSM are scattering their stories with caveats that "certain cultures" will find it unacceptable to be scanned.

    Well I do also.

  5. Stepping into the realms of the conspiracy fantasist, for a brief moment, – full body scanning has been in the news for quite some time now, and has met with much negativity, – in other words, the public don’t want it, however, the idea wont go away, perhaps because the govenment does want it.

    How to persuade us that it is really very necessary? – why if there was an incident – not too violent or too successful mind you, get some simpleton to admit he’s with alquaeda, and why then, it shouldn’t be too difficult to persaude us ‘Joe Blows’, to reluctantly accept the idea of the ‘Full Body Scan’.

    Of course this is just a stupid idea – no sensible person would consider that bureacrats would do such a thing! – but the bureaucrats – now they are a different breed, just stupid enough to think they can foist yet another expensive and time wasting fraud on us, and all in the name of ‘security’. I wonder what the excuse will be when some terrorist somewhere actually gets lucky and does blow a plane out of the sky.

    Will all those ride-along reporters, or perhaps those celebs, having a freebie on Air Force One be subjected to the same indignity? Now there’s a thought!….

    p.s. Colm, the Detroit bomber apparently managed to board his flight without a passport.

  6. An absurd idea and wholly pointless for security.
    So a device that would have revealed the equipment that the would-be bomber used is "wholly pointless for security". And rather than being a device for safety, this scanner is part of some massive government or state backed conspiracy to subjugate the masses. That’s a much more logical reason than say installing devices that could help find hidden bombs.

    It sucks, but what is the alternative? Racial profiling is only going to get those people who fit the profile – won’t take long to find someone who would pass the profiling – so-called "clean skins".
    Welcome to the real world.

  7. The fact that he boarded without a passport is an indictment of both the govt / airport system and of the airlines ( both KLM and Delta ) that accepted him as a passenger. This was a complete breakdown of all protocols.

  8. I get a full body search every time I travel by air. I also get semi annual mri’s and scans as part of a health checkup, which are not cheap. Do you think I can do a deal, and perhaps combine the two?

    Note to self; Check to see if the Homeland Security do prints….!

  9. The bit about the passport was an eye opener. That really was astonishing and heads should roll for it.

    I see no problem at all with full body scans. Anyone who objects for ‘cultural’ or any other reasons should be told "fine,you don’t fly then "

  10. no passport, no luggage, a one way ticket, on the list and his father even told the govt and the US embassy his son was dngerouse.

    But don’t worry the Obama head of DHS said the system worked. So were all safe

  11. no passport, no luggage, a one way ticket, on the list and his father even told the govt and the US embassy his son was dngerouse.

    Clearly the appropriate response is to demand a state worker bee puts your mother through a virtual strip search.

    Do me a favour.

  12. Not just a state worker screwup.

    The geniuses at KLM and Delta let a guy from Nigeria with no passport fly on their planes.

    Think about that.

    The private sector is no more responsible in these matters than the public sector is. Both will cut corners and both are capable of greatest stupidity

  13. Pete

    Do you think that if only certain ‘profiles’ are given full searches that terrorists won’t see how to evade that ?

    We either go down the whole full safety ‘El al’ security route regardless of inconvenience , or we return to a more relaxed experience of boarding planes but accept a nasty price to be paid for that. It’s foolish to think we can have great security with little inconvenience to those of us who are obviously not ‘terrorist profiles’

  14. Good point Phantom – a smack in the eye for the ‘leave it all to the private sector’ brigade

  15. Phantom.

    I was being diplomatic when I mentioned the ‘leave it all to the private sector’ brigade. I didn’t want to mention the obvious candidate. I see you were not so reticent ๐Ÿ˜‰

  16. Colm –

    You slightly miss the point of profiling, which is not to target only certain explody types with questions.

    Do you remember that Irish woman who (unknowingly) took a bomb through Heathrow to catch an El Al flight? It was a while ago but a well known case.

    She was questioned by El Al staff even though she’s Irish. When asked why she’s travelling to Israel she said it’s to marry her Arab fiancee. Where is he? Oh he’s flying to Israel seperately.

    Ding. They had one. Off came the case and there was the bomb. He was profiled even though he was on a tube train leaving Heathrow when the bomb was discovered.

    Connections dear boy, connections.

  17. Oh, I wasn’t mentioning her in that context ๐Ÿ™‚

    I just thought that this might be her chance to jump right in ๐Ÿ™‚

    This never would have happened if Sarah Palin was president. She would be like a breath of fresh air.

    The revelation struck me like a thunderbolt

  18. Pete

    True, but there are Brit and other native European converts who may not give any clues

    And Chechens who will to the untrained eye will appear Russian and who will have Russian sounding names and who will speak perfect Russian

    Yes, profiling is a must – but you need to look at everybody, with no exceptions, including grandma and the baby in the stroller. Because this enemy is not above planting a bomb on those persons.

    They have zero honor. This is what they do.

  19. Pete

    Fair enough, intelligent questioning and joining dots is of course vital, but ‘profiling’ to a lot of people does actually mean, search the darkies but leave me to sail through security quickly . It is foolish and stupid.

    Phantom

    We all know if La Palin was president there would never have been a recession, Al Queda would be a footnote from history, Israel would live happily and joyfully with it’s Arab (and Iranian) friends, becasue Sarah would just Golly gosh tell them to ! and every American would enjoy perfect cradle to grave healthcare at no cost to the taxpayer. I mean, that’s just obvious isn’t it ?

  20. Phantom –

    And Chechens who will to the untrained eye will appear Russian and who will have Russian sounding names and who will speak perfect Russian

    Untrained eye? Best leave the gummint out of it then.

  21. Furthermore, I bet the determined Jihadist will find ways around it

    And yet you seem incapable of working out that any determined Jihadist will find ways around profiling as well.

  22. FewsOranges

    OK – first few questions. Muslim? From Nigeria? What do think about 9/11? I think our security guys could do a job. YOU fly dhimmi classs Air Islam, I’ll take the non-Islam line.

  23. David

    Do you think a would be terrorist hoping to board a flight is going to give his true opinions of 9/11 to security staff ? . Are you still on the Christmas Sherry ๐Ÿ˜‰

  24. Colm,

    Attach them to a lie detector. Or, failing that. ask them did thek know Them Prophet was very very gay…

  25. I don’t think the full body scans could even be put in place (everywhere) as the equipment is expensive and the public/private sector seems disinclinded to bear that cost.

    I don’t have a problem with scanning on principle, it seems a fairly minor inconvenience to my personal rights for the comfort of knowing safety would be so enhanced.

    As for the Nigerian Underwear Jihadist, he raised more red flags than a Moscow May Day Parade. At this point one wonders what it would have taken for him to actually have been excluded from the flight by the nimrods who let him on.

  26. Colm –

    Do you think sanity would prevail in recruitment, or would the government insist muslims have the same chance of employment as a profiler as a Briton would?

    The entire idea is absurd unless and until Establishment orthodoxy is swept aside. The adoption of profiling in aviation implies profiling because of islamic terror. However, "equality n diversity" is the national religion and that precludes muslims from being barred from employment as profilers.

  27. Pete

    So the competent, intelligent and hard working profiler who actually could do a good job and actually wants to stop terror attacks gets turned down just for being a Muslim. Good work Pete. Get the gormless lazy, when do we knock off for tea ‘ but at least I’m a true C of E Brit’ from the dole queue to do the job instead eh ?

  28. All joking aside, it’s that they all seem so suicidal that makes any form of security so difficult. Makes me long for the days when hijacking was the fashion, at least we ended up with our feet on the ground.

    It must be one heck of a ‘religion’ that makes them so suicidal! – and yet we still give them a measure of credence!

  29. Pete

    "Colm –

    Do you think sanity would prevail in recruitment, or would the government insist muslims have the same chance of employment as a profiler as a Briton would?"

    What about a British Muslim?

  30. Colm –

    So the competent, intelligent and hard working profiler who actually could do a good job and actually wants to stop terror attacks gets turned down just for being a Muslim.

    Good luck with finding that muslim.

    aileen –

    What about a British Muslim?

    What’s a British muslim?

  31. Pete

    Someone who is British and Muslim.
    Have you got a defintion of British that means you can’t be Muslim?
    (if you just stick "and isn’t Muslim" at the end that’s cheating ;o) )

  32. aileen –

    Have you an explanation for how someone can be British and muslim?

    Nevermind. Of course no-one can be British and muslim. They are irreconcilable notions. This land of ours is a Christian land. Islam is an alien concept.

  33. Pete

    Talking nonsense again. Do you actually know the difference between majority tradition and compulsory membership ?

  34. Pete

    It is embarrassing that you need an explanation. Apart from anythign else anyone who is British and who isn’t Muslim can go out and convert and thus be both (unless there is some rule that debars British people from becoming Muslim).

    In general if someone is saying that someone (or thing) can be in two categories at the same time, and another saying that they can’t, any onus for proof or explanation is not on the former.

  35. aileen –

    A little correction:

    Apart from anythign else anyone who is British and who isn’t Muslim can go out and convert and thus be both

    Expulsion is something of a tradition for undesirables, it’s how Australia was colonised in part. Even today the British State expels proper Britons (Gary McKinnon will soon be off) so chucking out converts to that hostile and alien creed won’t be much bother when we find again our balls. Any sandpit will do.

  36. Agreed, Pete. Any native Briton who converts to islam should be exiled to a muslim country because that evil doctrine is completely incompatible with this country.

  37. I repeat "anyone who is British and isn’t muslim and convert to being muslim". I challange you again to give a definition of British that
    a) more than Pete Moore can comply with and
    b) doesn’t just add "and can’t be Muslim"

    Wish he’s pass it round Colm. I am unseasonably sober !!

  38. Best thing I have read on security

    . Excellent CNN piece.

    it shouldn’t be our goal merely to force the terrorists to make a minor change in their tactics or targets…

    Unfortunately for politicians, the security measures that work are largely invisible. Such measures include enhancing the intelligence-gathering abilities of the secret services, hiring cultural experts and Arabic translators, building bridges with Islamic communities both nationally and internationally, funding police capabilities — both investigative arms to prevent terrorist attacks, and emergency communications systems for after attacks occur — and arresting terrorist plotters without media fanfare.

Comments are closed.