It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Manchester Airport starts trial of 'strip-search' scanner

page: 2
6
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 09:25 AM
link   
Could be an opportunity for some enterprising dude to start selling metal underwear, or for the fashionista to popularise the codpiece again..

Hey you never know it might even get popular and once you have been through the scanner you queue up with your family to buy your picture? Get it printed on a t shirt, keyring or dinner place mats a gift for your mother in law..

On a slightly more serious note in todays climate of a pervert behind every door - is there going to be an age limit for going through these machines? Who's to say that Gary Glitter isn't working in the photomebits booth?

hmmmm

[edit on 13-10-2009 by badBERTHA]




posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 09:39 AM
link   
reply to post by badBERTHA
 


Exactly how do we know that there is no pervert doing the screening?

Should we take the word of those whom employ them, like hell. More invasion of peoples privacys.

And who says the UK Population does not live in a police state!



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 09:44 AM
link   
reply to post by badBERTHA
 




Very funny indeed ... still, there are serious underlying issues, despite the jokes that people will make.

My feeling is that this will be accepted with barely a whimper by the majority of the populace.

The rest of us will continue to become more marginalised and paranoid.

I still want to own a large island where I can be crowned Emperor for Life and I will make all the silly whimsical laws I can think of. Much like the USA, UK and EU actually.
I will even release all my island's UFO files to the world and fully disclose that fact I have No Clue (What's Going On Either).



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 09:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by badBERTHA
On a slightly more serious note in todays climate of a pervert behind every door - is there going to be an age limit for going through these machines? Who's to say that Gary Glitter isn't working in the photomebits booth?

hmmmm

[edit on 13-10-2009 by badBERTHA]


I'm thinking on how often people in positions of authority and, in particular, those who are entrusted with incredibly sensitive data, turn out to be 'unsavoury': police officers on paedophilia investigations and so on.



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 09:52 AM
link   
I'd say they'd be using it in Manchester because their excuse would be that the Mythical Al Quaeda suspects all come through the airport with it having international links to Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and the US.

However what I want to know is who is "securiting" the security, making sure one of these fools doesnt get through with a hidden camera and takes images of the computer screen in front of them (afterall theres only going to be ONE person looking at these images for all the thousands of travellers passing through the airport that day.) Might I also stress these are securital contractors, they have NO right to search you unless they have suspicions and provide proof of this otherwise. They are not airport police, MI5 or Special Ops, they have no power to search anyone, look at indecent images of you, unless theres just cause and they can provide substantial evidence. They are NOT above the law and you have full rights to argue this and to get actual Met Police involved (iornically with a base at MAN) to file for discrimination or attempted assault.



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 10:33 AM
link   
reply to post by ROBL240
 


It is a tough one.... on one hand we want to feel safe when we travel but on the other hand we don't like the invasion of privacy....

Anyway, how many times a year does the average person take a flight?

I'm guessing not many... maybe twice a year if that... so to just go through a scanner once or twice a year isn't really going to feel too intrusive... i'm betting that the majority will have forgotten about the scanner 5 or 10 mins after going through it.... plus you won't get searched at your destination which will save time & money.



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 10:39 AM
link   
reply to post by TruthxIsxInxThexMist
 


With all due respect, that's like saying "Being sexually harassed once or twice a year ain't no biggie, you get over it quickly".
Or in the immortal words of Whoopi Goldberg "it's not rape rape".

I think it is one of those vague things that I file under "My Principles".



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 10:50 AM
link   
I saw this on the news. I didn't think the scans were all that revealing actually. And they say the people monitoring are in a different room. It's not as if someone is eyeballing you and running a scanner along your curves..
The alternative is being frisked. As a female, I much prefer the new system to being pawed by a stranger. Eww....

[edit on 13-10-2009 by unicorn1]



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 11:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by unicorn1
I saw this on the news. I didn't think the scans were all that revealing actually. And they say the people monitoring are in a different room. It's not as if someone is eyeballing you and running a scanner along your curves..


Although, to put this into context, when paedophiles are wanking over child porn, the child is rarely in the same room either. Yes, I know it's different in terms of 'scale' but the principle is the same. Men, in particular, don't have to have women actually there: it's the principle of which pornography is based.


The alternative is being frisked. As a female, I much prefer the new system to being pawed by a stranger. Eww....

[edit on 13-10-2009 by unicorn1]


I think most women would to be honest, certainly all the women I know as I mentioned in a previous post. The problem is, it's inevitable that this will become a problem and it's just a case of when rather than if.

It's not helped by the fact we're offered a very limited paradigm of two choices here. People are thinking in terms of it's either the scanner or the pat down. When choice is limited people tend to fall more heavily towards one thing simply because of the lack of choice - a bit like two party politics.



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 11:15 AM
link   
reply to post by deltaalphanovember
 


No it's not.... being sexually harrassed is something totally different altogether... you ask someone here who has been sexually harrassed and i gaurantee you they will say 'going through a scanner is nothing compared to being sexually harrassed'



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 11:47 AM
link   
I wonder how much detail the viewer has . . .

I might have to walk by one while playing pocket pool



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 12:27 PM
link   
Time to bring back chain-mail I think. It'll stop the radiation issues too.

I went through Heathrow today, it's not far off a strip search anyway, remove your jacket, and shoes and belt...



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 12:37 PM
link   
This was in testing when I traveled through Manchester back in July. They did not ask if we would participate but demanded we go through it.



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 12:50 PM
link   
I think theres enough security as it is.

I went through Birmingham airport with my watch still on, and that didn't set the gate of. But when I went to go home from Belfast airport the foil from two packets of chewing gum set the gate off.

Aye, chewing gum...


So I got frisked in jeans that were much to big for me, but my belt was still in the tray where the bags had gone through. The guy who frisked me was okay, we ended up laughing about how tight security was, he let me empty my own pockets so his hands were never any more on me than was absolutely neccessary, and he had no problem if I ever dropped my arms to hold my trousers up... So aye, I'd rather be frisked infront of a tonne of people where I can gauge the person doing it and call him out if I think he's enjoying it a bit too much.



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 10:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by deltaalphanovember
reply to post by ninecrimes
 


Yep, I can imagine all the socially and sexually inadequate workers of the World of Customs flocking around this machine when they spot some gorgeous woman or celebrity waiting in line.



Hey miss, we had some technical difficulties. You will have to re-enter the machine. Now can you face us and jiggle a little. Ok, now face this way and bend over. Thank you for your corporation.

The operator to his pals, I really got some good photos out of that. hahaha

Kidding aside, I wonder if this x-ray machine will raise the chance of cancer in the future. Unless I'm wrong it is basically an x-ray machine right?



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 10:32 PM
link   
Great... now we'll have men that make sure they have an erection before they get on a plane so as not to appear too small to the "body scanner chick"



As for myself, I'm not worried...



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 10:33 PM
link   
These scanners are only really there so that they can capture your biometrics and keep them in a data base. If everyone were to walk through one of these we may not need a chip at all. Thew could tell who we are just by certain features of our bodies.

Those who believe that they won't keep the data that is scanned, must be out of their minds. Avoid them at all costs.



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 10:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Merriman Weir
Technology aside, what the hell is it with using Manchester as a test bed? The government wanted to us Manchester as a test bed for black boxes in cars, 'voluntary' ID cards and now this!


I'm guessing Manchester is the best target for testing stuff like this for a bunch of reasons. Mostly that everyone there is too drunk to read newspapers or protest. But it's Britain's foremost emerging culturally diverse city. There would be a stink if they tested this in London. So they do it in Manchester to get us used to the idea, and then pass it off onto the rest of the country. It's the same slimy tactic America uses when it tests all of it's new fascism in California.



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 05:04 AM
link   
I beleive these scanners are just another way to collect biometric data. What I'd like to know is what happens with it. I am all for more security on planes. But if these pictures get stored, which is most likely for latere reference, then I am against this system. If this system does just an instant check and deletes any data, then OK.



posted on Oct, 14 2009 @ 05:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lazyninja

Originally posted by Merriman Weir
Technology aside, what the hell is it with using Manchester as a test bed? The government wanted to us Manchester as a test bed for black boxes in cars, 'voluntary' ID cards and now this!


I'm guessing Manchester is the best target for testing stuff like this for a bunch of reasons. Mostly that everyone there is too drunk to read newspapers or protest.


Protest? You did see the news over the weekend?


But it's Britain's foremost emerging culturally diverse city. There would be a stink if they tested this in London.


Whilst I agree to an extent - although the London's congestion charge raises a query then - it does underline the point about Londoncentricism in this country. I mean, who gives a # about some city up north? I mean, as long as it's not London and the South East, right?



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join