I am sorry but I find this ridiculous of the US to even suggest.

[Love_Young]

Thank you for posting that article Baloo. I think it is important for everyone to read that.

And a thank you to fleo, angelbrat, and HoneyBird2. Your support and uplifting me a lot. And I agree with Baloo, life would be boring if we always agreed. 8)

 

[MandiF]

negatives are a part of life. look i have a totally new profile and i am getting negative ratings. and my old profile which i am not posting on cause i am locked out is STILL getting negatives. I am up to -91. So how is that? I am not even posting!
so i realised that there are haters on board.
thats cool with me..
cause I got my PR so HA HA haters!

LOLOLOLLLLL

 

[pinklady]

I would just like to say what an interesting thread this is, very opinionated, I like it.
My 2 cents is, I am fine with pat downs, xray scanners, anything that will stop terrorists, because its a real threat and it scares me. - Saying that, I have never had any negative experiences, or had anyone overstep the boundary.
Finally, I love america!! I am english but i think america is great. My husband is english and he agrees with me. If we could, we would move to Florida in a heartbeat! Maybe one day when we win the lottery! I have nothing but good things to say about USA.

But great thread! Enjoyed reading it!

 

[Baloo]

More opinion

Pinklady think about this... you said "anything that will stop terrorists," Ok, I can understand that, however....

The scanners do not detect the type of explosives used by the underwear bomber, but the reason for deploying the scanners was to catch another underwear bomber. A former head of Israeli airport security is on record saying that he can get enough explosives through the scanners to take down a 747.
The enhanced pat downs can't detect weapons inside the body, and yes this method has been tried.

Since 9/11 the TSA/DHS have caught no (zero) terrorists. Passengers stopped the shoe and underwear bombers, not the TSA.
Hijacking in the past was about taking the passengers and the plane to an airstrip, 9/11 was a whole new concept, very few passengers would have expected the final outcome. 9/11 cannot happen again, because (as shown on flight 93) the passengers won't let it.

The risk of dying from scanner radiation may be equal to the risk of dying in a terrorist attack. I asked my doctor about these machines, he (and his family) wont walk into the scanners, I take his advice. The problem is, there is no independent data about scanner radiation, the US government do not provide the numbers. When I have an x-ray at a medical facility or a dentist, I have to wear a protection garment, but in the scanners, your whole body is irradiated - Like I said, I won't use them (I no longer fly out of the US or the UK) I use airports where I am treated like a human and where I can walk through a metal detector and / or be checked by dogs.

Sadly, the TSA focuses on what they see as dangerous objects, but they do not focus on dangerous people.
This "security theatre" actually makes all of us less safe. It is not secure, in their own tests TSA agents do not detect over 70% of "test devices".

Good security is about passengers being vigilant and focused. However, the TSA lulls people into a false sense of security and often intimidates and humiliates passengers. What the US government is doing to people is wrong and it is dangerous, it makes people way more scared than they need to be, the terrorists must be laughing at the USA.

Do I go to the USA, sure, but on my terms - no groping or radiation.
In the end the US will not have any international tourist trade.

I am so glad I live in Canada.

 

[patiently_waiting]

All good points Baloo, but I have something else to add.

In the UK people are exempt (under 18's) from the scans as they are said to breach child protection act. Is that the case in US? What kinds of psychological testing are the security guards at the point of scan given to ensure that they are capable of performing the work that is assigned? It would be horrible for the wrong person to be put into that kind of authority position.Where do the images go once they are taken?

There will always be the debate of security over civil liberty, however IMO the scanners could potentially be more harmful in the long run. There is a lot more to think about on top of the already likeliness of being poisoned by radiation from the scans.

Someone earlier said there are criminals in every industry. We have a right to protect our children and ourselves from people that we may not know we need protection from.

 

[sheila la]

I know I am an American and maybe shouldn't be saying this but I do think the US needs to step off their high horse for a bit. They really need to be their own country and not try to tell other countries how to rule themselves. I think before long we won't be able to even travel back and forth across the US/Canada border. It is already hard as it is and now they are considering having Canadians needing visas to go to the US. Just my 2 cents but I find that way out of line. Instead of restricting travel, could they not just have better communication between the borders? And what happened to the sayings at Peace Arch?
"Brethren dwelling together in unity" "Children of a common mother" "May these gates never be closed"
Sounds like they might have to tear that down if they go against it.

I was watching the news tonight when I heard this story. Here is the article on the website if you would like to read: http://www.globalnational.com/world/BORDER+SECURITY/4205543/story.html

I understand that Canada sells it's number 1 lumber to the USA, does that mean we can now keep our best lumber and sell the USA our seconds?

 

[pinklady]

More opinion

Pinklady think about this... you said "anything that will stop terrorists," Ok, I can understand that, however....


I am so glad I live in Canada.

Baloo, you are english right? So do you never intend to go back to england? Or do you come across on a boat? Quite a trip!
I really think you are over reacting to all this scanner stuff, there is not a bit conspiracy to harm people.

Read this article, http://news.cnet.com/8301-27083_3-10423199-247.html

"The backscatter machines, meanwhile, are low-level X-ray machines that expose bodies to as much radiation as about two minutes of flying in an airplane does. In other words, if you already use a cell phone and you already fly, you are already exposing your body to more radiation than these scanners will."

Just chill out!!

 

[Baloo]

Yes I am a Brit and I avoid UK airports because people are not allowed to opt out of the x-ray.
When I go to the UK, I normally travel to friends who live in mainland Europe, then use the Euro-tunnel (train) in and out of the UK.

We all have our own choices to make, if you had suffered from skin cancer it is likely that you would not want to go near these machines either.

What you are quoting is hearsay, as I mentioned before, the US government do not release dosage information about these machines it is deemed - SSI (secret).


Note that the article you quote contains:

Since explosive materials were sneaked onto a U.S. domestic flight on Christmas Day, full-body scanning machines are far more likely to make their way to security lines at your local airport, even though they might not have detected said materials.

So even cnet states that the scanning machines may not detect explosives, I see no benefit in getting an x-ray if it does nothing for security, and can harm me.

BTW I am very chilled

 

[patiently_waiting]

I thought the xrays were in Heathrow and Manchester only??

 

[pinklady]

If you have suffered from skin cancer then I am extremely sorry to hear that. If I had, i also would want to avoid the scanners and would opt for the "pat down".
I just think that if the scanners can stop even one terror attack then they have been successful and I am happy for the added the security.

That must cost you quite a bit in travel expenses!
By the by, which airport do you fly to/from, manchester does not have said scanning devices, at least they didn't 1 month ago, just the standard metal detector. Manchester also has biometric passport scanner thingys which makes returning to england v easy for me.

 

[scylla]

I thought the xrays were in Heathrow and Manchester only??

Gatwick too.

 

[patiently_waiting]

Ya i knew they were initially in Manchester and Heathrow but Gatwick is a new one to me! Thanks Scylla!

 

[pinklady]

X-Ray Scanners
From February 1st 2010, additional Government legislation came into operation at this airport. Any selected passenger who refuses to use the scanner will be denied travel. More information

Copied from the manchester airport website.....
So they were not in play when i last passed through however it seems they now are, my mistake!

 

[Baloo]

It is not that expensive to fly via Europe - as an example:

dates 1st April return 30th April.

Ottawa to Heathrow ( return ) on Air Canada $989.

Same dates with Air Canada
Ottawa to Paris CDG - $923 Note that CDG has scanners but you can opt out and the pat down is just that, not a grope.

Cheaper by $66

Eurostar Paris - London Return $127 (£80)

So it would only cost me about $61 (£38) extra, but I get to visit friends and avoid the scanners. And the train is wonderful compared to the hassle of flying.

 

[Baloo]

X-Ray Scanners
From February 1st 2010, additional Government legislation came into operation at this airport. Any selected passenger who refuses to use the scanner will be denied travel. More information

Copied from the manchester airport website.....
So they were not in play when i last passed through however it seems they now are, my mistake!

The issue that I have is, in the UK, if the scanner is there, you cannot chose to opt out.