If you are selected for a full body scan and decline, you can't fly in the UK

[skunk]

Air passengers who refuse a full body scan to be barred from their flights (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1247715/Air-passengers-refuse-body-scan-barred-flights.html)

Not everyone will be required to be scanned, but if you are selected and refuse, you will not be able to board your plane.

But from what the transportation secretary says, this may become mandatory for everyone in the near future.

Related threads:

Body scanners can store and send images, says Electronic Privacy Information Center (http://amkon.net/body-scanners-can-store-t24307.html?t=24307)

Chertoff Group owns company that produces Body Scanners (http://amkon.net/chertoff-group-owns-company-t24197.html?t=24197)

Lieberman calls for invasion of Yemen and full body scanners at airports (http://amkon.net/lieberman-calls-for-invasion-t24113.html?t=24113)

And of course the most relevant, as promised:

Gordon Brown promises body scanners at airports (http://amkon.net/gordon-brown-promises-full-t24160.html?t=24160)

Asshat.

The move - strongly criticised by civil liberties campaigners who say the scanners are an invasion of privacy - follows the attempted Detroit bomb attack on Christmas Day.

Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab is accused of trying to detonate a bomb on a flight as it was about to land in the U.S. city.

Transport Secretary Lord Adonis said: 'In the immediate future, only a small proportion of airline passengers will be selected for scanning.

'If a passenger is selected for scanning and declines, they will not be permitted to fly.'

This invasive measure is going forward regardless of the fact that the body scanners would not have detected Umar's bombing attack.

"Al-Qaeda practises beating body scanners” (http://www.rnw.nl/english/article/%E2%80%9Cal-qaeda-practises-beating-body-scanners%E2%80%9D)

A body scanner at Amsterdam's Schiphol Airport would not necessarily have detected the explosives which the would-be syringe bomber, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab had sewn into his underwear. A Dutch military intelligence source told De Telegraaf newspaper that Al Qaeda has its own security scanners and has been practicing ways of concealing explosives.

So what's the fucking point of utilizing body scanners if they don't work like they're supposed to?

He said a code of conduct would govern how images were used and which passengers were checked.

Campaigners say the scanners, which act like a mini radar device 'seeing' beneath ordinary clothing, are an invasion of privacy.

The Equality and Human Rights Commission has warned that the scanners breach privacy rules under the Human Rights Act for their naked images.

The exemption of under 18s from being scanned, which was in place during the trial of the machines in Manchester, has also been removed.

The Department for Transport has published an interim code of practice for the scanners. The officer operating the machine never sees the image, and the employee viewing the scan must be in another room.

Under 18? Woops, you have to be scanned if the screener decides you are suspicious looking.

The scan cannot be saved, printed or transmitted. Passengers can also demand that only officers of their sex see their image.

Blatant lie.

Body scanners can store and send images, says Electronic Privacy Information Center (http://amkon.net/body-scanners-can-store-t24307.html?t=24307)

The model mentioned in the article above can send images during test mode, but who's to say they won't be run in test mode?

Head of customer experience Sarah Barrett said passengers had 'privacy concerns', but stressed that the airport had put in 'strict procedures'.

'It will enhance security for everyone, which can only be a good thing, without compromising people's privacy,' she said.

Well thank god you said that, I was really worried about privacy, and now that you've said its a good thing I am satisfied.

At least there's one man courageous enough to tell it like it is:

But Alex Deane, a barrister and director of campaign group Big Brother Watch, said such measures meant 'the terrorists have won'.

'People are understandably afraid of terrorism,' he said.

'But we didn't allow the IRA to impede our freedoms or change our way of life, and we shouldn't change now either.

'Those upset by the prospect of undergoing these scans shouldn't be forced to choose between their dignity and their flight.

'What kind of a free society does the Government think it is "protecting", when it invades our privacy like this?

'When we are forced to expose ourselves at the airport in order to go on holiday, the terrorists have won.'


Exactly.

The terrorists have already won.

[mur]

I don't have a tremendous problem with it.

How is it any different than a metal detector?

[skunk]

Do you have a picture of your body taken by metal detectors?

http://wihresourcegroup.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/4228503914_426f23e225_o.jpg

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/brainiac/airport_xray_scanner-thumb.jpg

[mur]

Who cares?

Are those pics are sexual?

I fail to see the big deal

[skunk]

Not to mention terhertz waves could potentially destroy DNA.

Would that matter to you?

Terahertz radiation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terahertz_radiation)

In October 2009, a possible mechanism of DNA damage from terahertz radiation was proposed, according to which resonant effects allow THz waves to unzip double-stranded DNA, creating bubbles in the double strand that could significantly interfere with processes such as gene expression and DNA replication.[8] However, the predicted DNA unzipping has not been verified experimentally.

How Terahertz Waves Tear Apart DNA (http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/arxiv/24331/)

But what of the health effects of terahertz waves? At first glance, it's easy to dismiss any notion that they can be damaging. Terahertz photons are not energetic enough to break chemical bonds or ionise atoms or molecules, the chief reasons why higher energy photons such as x-rays and UV rays are so bad for us. But could there be another mechanism at work?

The evidence that terahertz radiation damages biological systems is mixed. "Some studies reported significant genetic damage while others, although similar, showed none," say Boian Alexandrov at the Center for Nonlinear Studies at Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico and a few buddies. Now these guys think they know why.

Alexandrov and co have created a model to investigate how THz fields interact with double-stranded DNA and what they've found is remarkable. They say that although the forces generated are tiny, resonant effects allow THz waves to unzip double-stranded DNA, creating bubbles in the double strand that could significantly interfere with processes such as gene expression and DNA replication. That's a jaw dropping conclusion.

And it also explains why the evidence has been so hard to garner. Ordinary resonant effects are not powerful enough to do do this kind of damage but nonlinear resonances can. These nonlinear instabilities are much less likely to form which explains why the character of THz genotoxic
effects are probabilistic rather than deterministic, say the team.

This should set the cat among the pigeons. Of course, terahertz waves are a natural part of environment, just like visible and infrared light. But a new generation of cameras are set to appear that not only record terahertz waves but also bombard us with them. And if our exposure is set to increase, the question that urgently needs answering is what level of terahertz exposure is safe.

From the study found here:

DNA Breathing Dynamics in the Presence of a Terahertz Field (http://arxiv.org/abs/0910.5294)

We shouldn't be rushing to put these into use if there is a potential for DNA damage.

[mur]

If it isn't safe, then of course I would oppose.....and consent to a strip search.

You'd be okay with that in order to fly?

[skunk]

I'm not ok with either a strip search or full body scan. Why should I be?

[mur]

Why wouldn't you be?

[skunk]

Because they have no reason to? I have no intention of blowing the plane up.

[mur]

I guess nobody does.

There shouldn't be metal detectors either...right?

No police either?

[skunk]

I don't think I said there should be no security. The body scanners wouldn't have prevented the would-be bomber from blowing up the plane, according to a dutch intelligence official, whom I believe over the asshats at the TSA any day.

The current security measures are adequate enough, and have been working.

If the TSA security guards were trained a bit better in terms of picking up suspicious activity, we might not ever have hijacking attempts.

But they like to play pranks on flyers instead (http://amkon.net/tsa-employee-prank-flyer-t24473.html?t=24473).

Do you really want to give these people more power?

I'm not a huge fan of having to dump my liquids, but I can deal with that.

Not to mention these scanners don't pick up what someone has put inside them, so who's to say a hijacker or bomber wouldn't stash a weapon of some kind inside their vagina/butthole?

[Cogburn]

Reminiscent of the fat people flying thread.

Flying is not a universal human right.

Drive a car or take a boat.

[skunk]

I knew you'd say that. Still waiting on lex to jump on the bandwagon.

Did you read the article where it mentions T-Rays being potential destroyers of DNA?

Would you change your mind then?

[mur]

Full body scans translate to power?

As far as I'm aware....one can be singled out for a strip search at an airport, if you want to board a plane.

If the scans are safe, I'd rather the scan.

Yes...I'd rather there not be any terrorists, I'd rather that airport security not make jokes or play pranks.

But the reality is that airplanes are targets and the terrorists agree.

I wish that improved security wasn't necessary, but I don't think it is a stretch to say it is.

Terrorists or whatever you want to call them are going to try to find ways around the current measures.

If my mom or dad or my kids were on a plane, I'd want the tightest security possible

[skunk]

Full body scans translate to power?

Sure it does. As that article in the Philly airport mentions, some TSA employees get off on the little power they already have.

The ability to take pictures of people's bodies would only increase the potential for abuse of power.

[skunk]

The full body scanners (backscatters, as they're called) is the first step. More invasive technology is most surely on the way if these are implemented without much public outcry, which there doesn't seem to be.

[mur]

Sure it does. As that article in the Philly airport mentions, some TSA employees get off on the little power they already have.

The ability to take pictures of people's bodies would only increase the potential for abuse of power.

Those that abuse should be fired.

Plenty of folks need jobs.

That being said, there are all kinds of abuses going on.

I'd err on the side of caution.

[Cogburn]

Did you read the article where it mentions T-Rays being potential destroyers of DNA?

Would you change your mind then?

Not unless they started scanning me to drive in my car or to take a boat.

I took a flight the day after Christmas this year; the day after the bombing attempt. Security in each airport (three of them, to be exact) was metal detectors and pat-downs. What are these T-ray scanners if not electronic pat-downs?

Most cancers are caused by neutrinos flying through the universe that pass through body and accidently knock a peptide chain off of the end of a DNA strand. I'd be interested to see what the likelihood is of a T-ray hitting a DNA chain as opposed to free neutrinos from the sun, as well as compared to the cancer rates of an X-ray.

Be careful of the big words in your article...

Ordinary resonant effects are not powerful enough to do do this kind of damage but nonlinear resonances can. These nonlinear instabilities are much less likely to form which explains why the character of THz genotoxic effects are probabilistic rather than deterministic...

[skunk]

Not unless they started scanning me to drive in my car or to take a boat.

In jack's wet dream of a country under martial law maybe. Time will tell.

Oh, and I think some of the scanners use X-Rays, while some of them use T-rays. There seems to be a handful of different products on the market.

[mur]

The full body scanners (backscatters, as they're called) is the first step. More invasive technology is most surely on the way if these are implemented without much public outcry, which there doesn't seem to be.


It's coming whether we like it or not.

There isn't any real outcry because the flying public wants secure air travel.

Full body scans to leave your home might be a different story.

Big brother like surveillance is certainly a concern at some point.

Full body scans at airports doesn't seem unreasonable...if safe.

[Cogburn]

Right... because nobody ever had an idea this shit was coming.

http://ajfederation.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/fullbodyscan.jpg

[skunk]

Coming soon.

[Hobbit]

This security thing is more about scarmongering than any effective means of avoiding a terrorist attack.

Beside 9/11 (which is a story within itself) how many of these planes have been taken out.

remember the baby milk fiasco .

[Hobbit]

I remeber flying into the states after 911, had hand luggage and my Mrs make up had split and you could see the moisturiser within the clear plastic bag. She had already passed through security and I was stuck with the questions- With a retarded Dick Tracey from homeland security

WHAT IS THAT - womens make up :)
WHAT IS IT - 'rolls eyes' probabaly moisturiser its my Mrs make up, its obviously some type of cream etc. Surely you you are aquainted with cosmetids in the states (bad idea):rolleyes:
CAN YOU COME THIS WAY SIR. :(

Now I had two people , luckly the second guy had a little common sense.

First guy rubber gloves and all ask me to open the make up bag.

WHAT IS THAT WHITE SUBSTANCE ? - I can tell you a couple of responses immediatley sprung to mind. I also wanted to say 'fuck your good your very good ' but the rubber gloves and the uneasy way he was looking at me I just smiled and kept my answers down to the
small syllables.

So I opened the make up bag dipped my finger into the moisturiser and ate it - see moisturiser -

At this stage the other guy thank me for my co -operation and let me go.

But the first guy was still looking at me like I was Bin laden ' love child

[boycotteverything]

fuck it all. just ban clothes on flights. guarantee they'll be more fun.

[Lexion]

Flying is not a universal human right.

Drive a car or take a boat.


I knew you'd say that. Still waiting on lex to jump on the bandwagon.

I've been on the bandwagon.

No jumping required.

Don't like it, don't fly.

[hp]

On the other side of the coin, it some one does actually board with some contraband and cause a disaster, the out cry of the security failure with be no ending. Either A or B.

[Lexion]

True, HP.

I've said it before, those screaming
about scanners will be the first in
line for the class-actions, if an attack
happens.

[skunk]

Oh really lex?

[Pam]

Save for my recent fears of flying.... I will never have to endure any of this, but I think it is a great idea.

Whatever is necessary to make air travel safe, should be done. I am also for sniffer dogs, who cares if some people are afraid of dogs.

[Lexion]

Oh really lex?


Maybe I should clarify.

Not individuals so much, but
the organizations.

[skunk]

Well I can certainly see why the patriot act(s) passed without much concern.

The Ben Franklin quote about those who trade liberty for security deserve neither comes to mind.

[hp]

Airlines are a private enterprise. Seems that risks are large. It might be different if the airlines were government run. Every passenger would be liable for problems as taxpayers.

[skunk]

I definitely understand why cog compared this to the fatty airline thread. Flying is not a right, I agree, I still see no reason for these kind of measures to be taken.

Do you honestly believe you're safer?

Its only to calm your mind.

If someone wanted to blow up the plane, they would. No amount of security is going to stop that.

Shove a pound of dynamite up your ass with a lighter, hop on a plane, and blow it up midflight.

[hp]

If someone wanted to blow up the plane, they would. No amount of security is going to stop that.

A lot of truth in that. It would be done in a way that scanner will not prevent.

[Pam]

I definitely understand why cog compared this to the fatty airline thread. Flying is not a right, I agree, I still see no reason for these kind of measures to be taken.

Do you honestly believe you're safer?

Its only to calm your mind.

If someone wanted to blow up the plane, they would. No amount of security is going to stop that.

Shove a pound of dynamite up your ass with a lighter, hop on a plane, and blow it up midflight.

The full body scan would have discovered the pound of dynamite in your ass. That is why I think whatever is necessary to make flying safer, should be done.

[hp]

Drug runners and those linked to terrorist groups now have their own planes. How long before a rouge fight jet is used in an attack. We saw how well the air defense works as for as timing.

[Hobbit]

opening 2 or 3 doors at 50,000 ft, will do the job

[hp]

The full body scan would have discovered the pound of dynamite in your ass.

The full body scan will detonate the pound of dynamite in your ass. Plane is intact, terminal not so much.

[mur]

The Ben Franklin quote about those who trade liberty for security deserve neither comes to mind.

What liberty has been traded or lost?

[Lexion]

We saw how well the air defense works as for as timing.

Talking about NORAD during 9/11 ?

I think an un-registered fighter
would prompt a response just a
tad faster than a commercial
airline.

[skunk]

The full body scan would have discovered the pound of dynamite in your ass. That is why I think whatever is necessary to make flying safer, should be done.

No it wouldn't. They're not x-rays that go through your body, they only penetrate your clothing.

If you had something shoved up your ass, there's no way in hell they're going to be able to detect it.

Not to mention a dutch intelligence official claims the body scanners would not even have detected the recent Detroit bomber because he had the bomb sewn into his underwear.

Al Qaeda practicing beating scanners (http://www.rnw.nl/english/article/%E2%80%9Cal-qaeda-practises-beating-body-scanners%E2%80%9D)

A body scanner at Amsterdam's Schiphol Airport would not necessarily have detected the explosives which the would-be syringe bomber, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab had sewn into his underwear. A Dutch military intelligence source told De Telegraaf newspaper that Al Qaeda has its own security scanners and has been practicing ways of concealing explosives.

Whatever security measures you implement, you bet your ass somebody somewhere is training to beat them.

No amount of technology is going to stop attacks. It'll take well-trained, intelligent security officers, and vigilant passengers.

[skunk]

What liberty has been traded or lost?

Slippery slope argument...First you allow body scanners at airports, then its all federal buildings, so on and so forth.

[hp]

Lex, i would hope so but one never knows what tricks might be used to get that small edge needed.

[Pam]

No it wouldn't. They're not x-rays that go through your body, they only penetrate your clothing.

If you had something shoved up your ass, there's no way in hell they're going to be able to detect it.

No amount of technology is going to stop attacks. It'll take well-trained, intelligent security officers, and vigilant passengers.

Edited quote for space only.

Then on with the rubber gloves.

[skunk]

So everyone should have full body cavity searches? You're willing to submit to a full body cavity search just to board an airplane?

You're a statist's wet dream.

Make sure to bend over while they fuck you too.

[Pam]

Like I said, I have a new found fear so it won't happen, but if someone felt it necessary for the potential safety of others, poke away.

I also have no qualms about cameras in public places, or having someone go through my purse at a sporting event etc. etc.

If you have nothing to hide, you have no worries.

[Lexion]

If you have nothing to hide, you have no worries.

That's gonna get your ass jumped.

I know from experience.

[skunk]

If you have nothing to hide, you have no worries.

Wow, you can't honestly tell me you believe that bullshit?

Let me come search through your home, you have nothing to hide right?

Let me come search through your body, you have nothing to hide right?

Let me come search through your brain, you have nothing to hide right?

Look what we have here, a thought criminal!

[mur]

Slippery slope argument...First you allow body scanners at airports, then its all federal buildings, so on and so forth.

I still fail to see any real difference between these body scanners and metal detectors.

The purpose of these devices is to prevent weapons at places where there should not be weapons.

I'd agree that where there is a will, there is a way....but I believe most would support all reasonable means to stop weapons on planes.

I understand that a line would need to be drawn at some point, but this isn't it.

I have gone through metal detectors at airports, sporting events, court houses, and federal buildings.

They even have them at schools.

What liberty have I lost?

[hp]

The alternative is to go with more war and wipe the terrorist and those who 'grow' them of the Earth. Then it is moot until the next issue comes along. Mankind does it to itself.

[Pam]

The only place I EXPECT privacy, is in my own home.

There are too many fucknuts in this world, they scare me, they make me afraid to do things I shouldn't fear. They make me watch my back when walking alone in the dark, they make my heart pound when I see a certain look in their eyes.

Why shouldn't there be some forms of security to make me feel safer. Now if there weren't any fucknuts out there, there would be no reason for all this shit, but they are out there and there are not enough "good/normal" people watching each others backs.

Maybe the screen technic should be used in the womb, will this person be a fucknut? Terminate!

[skunk]

Lol, now you get to decide who lives and who dies.


The alternative is to go with more war and wipe the terrorist and those who 'grow' them of the Earth. Then it is moot until the next issue comes along. Mankind does it to itself.

I think that's what we're trying to do, although our actions are creating more terrorists in the process.

[skunk]

I understand that a line would need to be drawn at some point, but this isn't it.

What liberty have I lost?

If we don't draw a line in the sand now, there will never be a line.

Its quite obvious I will not change any of your minds, nor your mine.

I do hope you feel safer while walking through an airport, bus station, public place, or heck, even at home, as a result of this technology.

Don't come crying to me when their use is expanded, and more invasive technologies are prevalent.

[Pam]

Draw the line at your doorstep.

I wouldn't want to be the one that decided who would live or die, it is not in my nature, but if there was a way to determine someone's outcome before that horrible thing happened then I would be okay with someone else doing the deed, as long as it was 100% proven to be infallible.

I really hate to even think that way, but there is just so much shit happening in this world, and all I want to do is have fun :D

[skunk]

You can be the first pre-crime officer.

[mur]

If we don't draw a line in the sand now, there will never be a line.

Its quite obvious I will not change any of your minds, nor your mine.

I do hope you feel safer while walking through an airport, bus station, public place, or heck, even at home, as a result of this technology.

Don't come crying to me when their use is expanded, and more invasive technologies are prevalent.

Why wasn't the line drawn at metal detectors, or driver licenses, or social security numbers?

[mur]

You can be the first pre-crime officer.


Not really. Terrorist plots have been thwarted before the actual crime takes place.

Conspiracy to commit

[skunk]

Why wasn't the line drawn at metal detectors, or driver licenses, or social security numbers?

I wasn't alive when any of those were implemented :D.

Drivers licenses makes sense though, social security numbers allow you to claim social security, and metal detectors are not all that invasive.

Full body scans taking pictures of what's under your clothes is way more intrusive.

How do you not see that?

[Pam]

Not really. Terrorist plots have been thwarted before the actual crime takes place.

Conspiracy to commit

I think he was referring to my post Mur, it bugs me that I can even say something like that, but what bugs me more is having to ever feel fear, it is a emotion that no one should have to experience.

[hp]

I wouldn't want to be the one that decided who would live or dieWonder how many pro death penalty people are pro as long as they are not on the jury or the one who 'throws the switch' in the death chamber.

Roll on two...

[Pam]

Believe it or not, after my earlier statement, but I am not pro death.

I am more, put them all on an Island that they have absolutely no way of getting off of and handing them the tools to do to each other as they wish.

[hp]

That has crossed my mind also...

[mur]

Full body scans taking pictures of what's under your clothes is way more intrusive.

How do you not see that?

There is nothing underneath my clothes so what's the problem?

[skunk]

See my post to pam above ^^^.


Wow, you can't honestly tell me you believe that bullshit?

Let me come search through your home, you have nothing to hide right?

Let me come search through your body, you have nothing to hide right?

Let me come search through your brain, you have nothing to hide right?

Look what we have here, a thought criminal!

[mur]

Skunk,

At some point I can see myself opposing an intrusion into privacy.

Full body scanners at airports doesn't rise to that level for me.

[skunk]

Fair enough, I can respect that. I don't agree, but I can respect your belief.

What would be too much for you, out of curiosity?

[pack3tg0st]

Are they forcing you to fly?

[skunk]

Of course not, we have already established flying is a privilege, and not a right.

[pack3tg0st]

Of course not, we have already established flying is a privilege, and not a right.

then its not really an invasion of privacy..

either you agree to the scans... or you don't fly...

flying isn't a neccessity of life or anything...

we should only be pissed if they want to conduct a full body scan when you enter a grocery store...

[skunk]

Its a slippery slope and you know it pack, but I definitely understand why y'all see no problem with these at airports, and no amount of bitching on my part is going to change their existence.

If most people want them to make them feel safer, then they'll be implemented.

[pack3tg0st]

no its not.

the slippery slope argument fails 90% of the time.

Its just a way that people who produce 'spin' get you pissed about things you really don't need to be pissed about.

[skunk]

Double post fail.

[mur]

Fair enough, I can respect that. I don't agree, but I can respect your belief.

What would be too much for you, out of curiosity?

I've been thinking about it...since we are having this discussion.

I don't have a good answer at this point.

Best I can say is I'd hope to recognize it when it comes, and I'd agree that the line in the sand might be approaching.

However, anything that helps to bans weapons in public places, except for those legally authorized to carry, I'd generally support.

If it's safe ;)

[hp]

we should only be pissed if they want to conduct a full body scan when you enter a grocery store...

But then, a store is a private enterprise. The owner could do the same. What happens when all stores do it. I suspect the answer is one guy doesn't and gets all the business.

[skunk]

This would be an interesting argument to carry over to another thread. I'm going to start one about "What is too much"?

[pack3tg0st]

But then, a store is a private enterprise. The owner could do the same. What happens when all stores do it. I suspect the answer is one guy doesn't and gets all the business.

yup lol

skunk: I can't seem to edit that double post to delete it.... cookie error or something... or maybe just another firefox memory leak hahaha. can you fix that for me?

[skunk]

Privacy/civil liberty discussion continued here:

http://amkon.net/what-too-much-invasion-t24724.html?p=339364

[hp]

I'm a store owner without scanners. I sit in my explosion proof bunker counting all the money I get because no one shops at the body scanned stores. I don't worry if customers get blown up.

Has it happened? No, the terrorists have to get their groceries somewhere.

[skunk]

But then, a store is a private enterprise. The owner could do the same. What happens when all stores do it. I suspect the answer is one guy doesn't and gets all the business.

Exactly. Private businesses can operate however they see fit, but who's to say every store wouldn't implement such measures to protect their customers?

Some people probably wouldn't shop at stores that didn't have "adequate security".

[hp]

Some people probably wouldn't shop at stores that didn't have "adequate security". That is probably true. Guess the bombers would still blow up the less secure places despite that fact that those shopping there would most likely be the people who side with the cause of peace and human rights, those weirdos the police state frowns upon.

[boycotteverything]

Anyone who decides that he/ she can not abide the indignation of electronic strip-search should refuse to fly. Simple as that. Quit your bitching and vote with your feet.

[Snow Crash]

The Ben Franklin quote about those who trade liberty for security deserve neither comes to mind.

Fear born out of extreme ignorance and/or apathy allows this shit to go unchecked.

Like that family from Florida who got RFID implants to 'stop Terrorists'.... hahaha

[Lexion]

Like that family from Florida who got RFID implants to 'stop Terrorists'.... hahaha

Link ?

[Snow Crash]

If someone wanted to blow up the plane, they would. No amount of security is going to stop that.

Indeed. In a similar vein, the New Labour Government in the UK has a major hard-on for introducing national ID cards to be produced on request by a stormtrooper police officer.

Some reporter met up with some guy who cloned a demo card in about fifteen minutes, if memory serves.

Its like banning guns: criminals are going to get guns, even if theres a law against guns. Fuck, you can get LMGs and .50 cal snipers even in a place like the UK if you know the right folks. This is why I laugh when people (tends to be right wing seppos with delusions of 'freedom') go on about there being no guns in the UK.

[Snow Crash]

Link ?


Not Just for Those with Alzheimer's
Jeffrey and Leslie Jacobs and their teenage son Derek, whose "chipping" will be a national media event, don't have problems with dementia. The Boca Raton, Florida family has a mixture of ailments and interests: Jeffrey, 48, has been treated for Hodgkin's disease and has suffered through a car crash, a degenerative spinal condition, chronic eye disease and abdominal operations - he takes 16 medications. His injuries have forced him to quit his dental practice. Son Derek, 14, is allergic to certain antibiotics. Mostly, though, he's a computer buff who considers the procedure "nifty". As for Leslie, 46, she's merely hoping to feel more secure in an insecure world.


Emphasis, mine

As requested (http://www.flatrock.org.nz/topics/info_and_tech/humans_receive_i_d_chips.htm)

I saw this woman on a TV report... made my skin crawl.

[Snow Crash]

If you have nothing to hide, you have no worries.

I'd give you both barrels Pam, but A) it wouldn't make a difference, and B) that nefarious Skunk fellow beat me to it.

Still, when you have all aspects of your life controlled, maybe, just maybe, you will understand why facism isn't cool.

[Lexion]

For medical info, I have no
qualms with a chip.

[Snow Crash]

The alternative is to go with more war and wipe the terrorist and those who 'grow' them of the Earth.

Such an option would never be taken, because it would invariably result in Washington DC getting nuked, as well as THAT place in Virginia.

Oh wait! I forgot! Only people like Iran make terrorists, right?

[Lexion]

Oh wait! I forgot! Only people like Iran make terrorists, right?

Sarcasm detected.

[Snow Crash]

For medical info, I have no
qualms with a chip.

For alzheimers patients, its a great idea. For the average joe? no fucking way.

[Snow Crash]

Sarcasm detected.

Ah! You replaced the batteries in your sarcasm detector. Told you not to trust that fucking Bunny... something that cute doesn't have good power storage capacity.

[Lexion]

For alzheimers patients, its a great idea. For the average joe? no fucking way.

I'm allergic to a few meds.

I have bi-lateral hip replacements.
(dis-lodged in the wrong actions)

I have no problem with medical
chips.

Hell, I'd love to have my debit
card as a chip, in my hand.

[Snow Crash]

Draw the line at your doorstep.

Haha... they are already in your home. Think about it.

[Lexion]

Haha... they are already in your home. Think about it.

I covered that, in Skunks thread.

[Snow Crash]

There is nothing underneath my clothes so what's the problem?

Fuckit then. everyone in an airport, security and passengers, should be butt naked. I wonder how the small penis fed crew would feel about that.

[Cogburn]

I'm allergic to a few meds.

I have bi-lateral hip replacements.
(dis-lodged in the wrong actions)

I have no problem with medical
chips.

Hell, I'd love to have my debit
card as a chip, in my hand.

Given the proliferation of RFID hacking I'd rather have it based on a 25 point fingerprint, retina, and/or voice print comparison.

[Lexion]

Given the proliferation of RFID hacking I'd rather have it based on a 25 point fingerprint, retina, and/or voice print comparison.

All of the above are on
file, for me.

[Snow Crash]

Anyone who decides that he/ she can not abide the indignation of electronic strip-search should refuse to fly. Simple as that. Quit your bitching and vote with your feet.

Boycott aircraft! That way I can have my transatlantic hypersonic train constructed and make biwwions!

Well, its not really MY idea, but I'll buy it Monopoly style.

[hp]

If you are selected for a full body scan and decline, you can't fly in the UK

I can see the argument for scan everyone or no one.