Anyone Travel To/From The Us To Thailand Lately?

[Spee]

additionally;

"We have received hundreds of e-mails and phone calls from travelers vowing to stop flying," Geoff Freeman, an executive vice president of the U.S. Travel Association, told Reuters.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/TRAVEL/11/12/travel.screening/?hpt=T1

I'm one of those. If my US domestic travel is <= 500-600 miles, I'm driving about 100% of the time. It's just not worth dealing with the hassle and the bureaucratic down time. With all this latest nonsense, plus all the domestic airline b.s. of seat and baggage up charges, my range will be expanding. To me, it's as if the government and airlines are deliberately putting up reasons to avoid flying.

Fortunately, this doesn't yet apply to my domestic travel in Thailand, where an easy 40 minute hop from Bkk-Phs is still far easier than driving, although taking the train is just as easy as it stops an hour closer to home.

[Rinrada]

We have received hundreds of e-mails and phone calls from travelers vowing to stop flying

Cant help thinking...........................GOOD......

[kpmsprtd]

Here's a link to a good article on CNET. Lots of good comments, too.

Backlash grows over TSA's 'naked strip searches'

Finally, the sheeple may have had enough. Perhaps this is the beginning of seeing these TSA goons disappear entirely. I, for one, felt much safer before they arrived on the scene. Call me a coward if you must, but they scare me greatly.

[jdinasia]

What do you have to hide?

exactly -----

If there is an airport "known" for being lax with customs/immigration/scanning/searches I sure hope that it gets corrected and quickly! The expectation of privacy does not exist for international travellers, particularly in the modern world. You are subject to search at any time when on the grounds of an airport. If you choose not to enter a body scanner then you will certainly be more likely to be singled out for more 'personal' inspection by the people paid to keep their country safe and the skies safe.

[lomatopo]

In the U.S.A. the TSA confiscates, or whatever they call it, hundreds of thousands of gallons of liquids at check-points each year. Interestingly they do not test any of these liquids, and these liquids are disposed of as common trash. One would think that if they were truly concerned about air safety they would be testing some of these seizures and matching them up against travelers in an effort to track down potential terrorists. And if these liquids are potentially dangerous why keep them around in ordinary trash bins all day? Meanwhile government auditors continue to smuggle all sorts of contraband through/around checkpoints, and onto aircraft. I know, I know, if we are not prepared to sacrifice our rights as citizens then the terrorists win.

[WarpSpeed]

@Sarahsbloke

That's not a stupid question. I'm not sure if I can post links here or not but you can google naked body scanners or full body scanners.

They're the big devices that have been implemented in many airports this last year. The TSA makes the passengers go inside of the machine, then put their hands up in the air (like they're about to be arrested) and then the machine uses a kind of x-ray to take a 3D picture of the naked person's body.

Partially true but a little misleading in it's presentation, this implies that the person is naked which they are not. The machine just sees through the persons clothes without removing them to examine whether or not you are carrying explosives a complete violation of privacy and unlike another members willingness to give up their privacy so easily I find this a serious intrusion and that old attempt at putting one on the defensive by asking "what do you have to hide?" does not hold water..

After a year or so of this invasive policy in place I'd like to see some real numbers about how many people they've caught trying to board a plane with explosives...Oh that's right it's more of a deterrent! BS!!! There's always something else just like the thread on them attempting to use explosives in dogs to try to down an airliner. It's a perpetual circle and they're winning with every "security measure" we put in place that further restricts our freedom and privacy, it's playing their game by their rules and plays right into the hands of governments that seek to restrict and monitor us anyway....

None of the supposed "bombers" have been successful they've all been easily restrained by alert passengers and crew and only injured themselves. They've not even had enough explosives to make much more then a small, easily containable fire whether shoes or underwear... Soon we'll all be flying nud_e................. hmmmmm maybe on second thought.......................Nah...... The way my luck goes I'd get stuck next to some lady boy for a 30 hour flight .........

To answer some above they most certainly do see your wares in full detail...

It probably would have caught that guy with explosives in his underwear. And with these, will prevent copycats from trying it again. I'm sure we never hear of all the times people/things have been caught before boarding a plane. I'm sure Israel, UAE, etc. won't publish these items. And like the dogs, we just found out about it years later.

If it is a deterrent, great! I'm more safe. And they are not winning. If they were, there would be more airplanes downed. They are doing the best job they can. Give them a break.

The reports are that both the underwear bomber and the shoe bomber had enough explosives to bring the plane down. If done properly and properly placed. It only takes one window being blown out at altitude to really cause problems. Heck, a fire on a plane is a big deal. Even if small.

Do a google search on full body scanner. Plenty of pics are posted to see what is exposed. Not a big deal if it helps protect me. I'm all for it.

More like, give me a break ....

Now where's that binky icon??

Oh! here it is........

Edited November 14, 2010 by WarpSpeed

[craigt3365]

Let's see...2 attempts recently to take down planes....many more in the past several years. If I am on that plane, I want everybody to go through a scan. Too many crazies out there.

On the other hand, it is an invasion of privacy. Not much you can do about it considering the world we live in now. Get use to it...or quit traveling. It ain't gonna change.

Like I said before. We should have 2 planes. One where everything possible is used to protect the passengers, another where you just step in. After a few explosions on the unsecured plane, which line do you think would be empty? Easy answer. The terrorists have won...our lives have changed. No going back.

P.S. I lived in NYC when the WTC was hit. I watched in person while the first tower crash. I worked in those buildings, so this is a bit personal to me. I hope you can understand that. It was a life changing event for sure. If the current security measures had been in place back then, many thousands would still be alive. Do I still deserve a passifier for that? Don't think so...

[WarpSpeed]

In the U.S.A. the TSA confiscates, or whatever they call it, hundreds of thousands of gallons of liquids at check-points each year. Interestingly they do not test any of these liquids, and these liquids are disposed of as common trash. One would think that if they were truly concerned about air safety they would be testing some of these seizures and matching them up against travelers in an effort to track down potential terrorists. And if these liquids are potentially dangerous why keep them around in ordinary trash bins all day? Meanwhile government auditors continue to smuggle all sorts of contraband through/around checkpoints, and onto aircraft. I know, I know, if we are not prepared to sacrifice our rights as citizens then the terrorists win.

Good point... But surely someone with more security sense (read paranoia) will have a sensible response.............................. Not!!!

[lomatopo]

Let's see...2 attempts recently to take down planes....many more in the past several years. If I am on that plane, I want everybody to go through a scan. Too many crazies out there.

You do realize that both those flights originated outside the U.S. (CDG and AMS, shoe and underwear respectively)? Not sure what good the TSA can do in those cases? (Yes, there is one body scanner at AMS now.)

And "many more" attempts? Citation please.

From Wiki:

On December 21, 2001, Reid attempted to board a flight from Paris, France to Miami, Florida, but his boarding was delayed because his disheveled physical appearance aroused the suspicions of the airline passenger screeners. Reid also did not answer all of their questions, and had not checked any luggage for the transatlantic flight. Additional screening by the French National Police resulted in Reid's being re-issued a ticket for a flight on the following day.[13] He returned to the Paris airport on December 22, 2001, and he boarded American Airlines Flight 63 from Paris to Miami, wearing his special shoes packed with plastic explosives in their hollowed-out bottoms.

Here's looking forward to the "rectal bomber", and the ensuing search techniques. Gamma ray scanners anyone.

Edited November 14, 2010 by lomatopo

[WarpSpeed]

P.S. I lived in NYC when the WTC was hit. I watched in person while the first tower crash. I worked in those buildings, so this is a bit personal to me. I hope you can understand that. It was a life changing event for sure. If the current security measures had been in place back then, many thousands would still be alive. Do I still deserve a passifier for that? Don't think so...

Yes it was personal to me too since my sister in law should have been on the 96th floor of tower 2 at that time. Fortunately for her she was late to work that day and didn't even know what happened until family and friends called her. But they have sorted this threat now and JFYI we'll always be behind the curve and they will always be changing the rules until we have no freedoms left what-so-ever just as they recently did with the cargo planes a line needs to be drawn. In the mean time we are jumping through all of their hoops like trained monkeys and throwing good money after bad to try to head them off & I for one resent it and reject it...

How many nutters that pose a possible risk to you do you think you walk past on a daily basis and now add any terrorist that thinks just because of your nationality that you're fair game and do you stay at home under the covers hiding or hire a full time 24 hour security guard or do you just continue to live your life?

Exactly!!! This is no difference then the chances of being that one in a million victim or on that one in a million plane that crashes without terrorist intervention and is no greater then every day life, the only difference is that you just give up YOUR freedom to fly and travel without personal affronts... IMO those that are that insecure should just stay home, that's equal to you or anyone saying that I or anyone else has something to hide for our displeasure and protest over these personal intrusions and losses of freedoms and IF we don't accept them we should just travel some other way or stay home we have every right that you do without being guilted into capitulation......

Edited November 14, 2010 by WarpSpeed

[kpmsprtd]

Let's see...2 attempts recently to take down planes....many more in the past several years. If I am on that plane, I want everybody to go through a scan. Too many crazies out there.

On the other hand, it is an invasion of privacy. Not much you can do about it considering the world we live in now. Get use to it...or quit traveling. It ain't gonna change.

Like I said before. We should have 2 planes. One where everything possible is used to protect the passengers, another where you just step in. After a few explosions on the unsecured plane, which line do you think would be empty? Easy answer. The terrorists have won...our lives have changed. No going back.

P.S. I lived in NYC when the WTC was hit. I watched in person while the first tower crash. I worked in those buildings, so this is a bit personal to me. I hope you can understand that. It was a life changing event for sure. If the current security measures had been in place back then, many thousands would still be alive. Do I still deserve a passifier for that? Don't think so...

You do realize, don't you, Craig, that the "authorities" had numerous opportunities to catch the Saudi perpetrators of the 9-11 attack without using any security theater measures? It is a matter of allocating resources properly. The "authorities" can spend their time hassling innocent travellers (99.99% of all travellers), or they can spend their time on those who are actually a threat (00.01% of all travellers). My version of logic demands the latter. The version of security that you are advocating is akin to draining an entire lake in order to catch one fish.

On this matter, we will have to respectfully disagree. I will not get used to this. And I will not quit traveling. I do feel heartened to see that pilot and aircrew unions are speaking out against the madness.

[WarpSpeed]

Let's see...2 attempts recently to take down planes....many more in the past several years. If I am on that plane, I want everybody to go through a scan. Too many crazies out there.

You do realize that both those flights originated outside the U.S. (CDG and AMS, shoe and underwear respectively)? Not sure what good the TSA can do in those cases? (Yes, there is one body scanner at AMS now.)

And "many more" attempts? Citation please.

From Wiki:

On December 21, 2001, Reid attempted to board a flight from Paris, France to Miami, Florida, but his boarding was delayed because his disheveled physical appearance aroused the suspicions of the airline passenger screeners. Reid also did not answer all of their questions, and had not checked any luggage for the transatlantic flight. Additional screening by the French National Police resulted in Reid's being re-issued a ticket for a flight on the following day.[13] He returned to the Paris airport on December 22, 2001, and he boarded American Airlines Flight 63 from Paris to Miami, wearing his special shoes packed with plastic explosives in their hollowed-out bottoms.

Here's looking forward to the "rectal bomber", and the ensuing search techniques. Gamma ray scanners anyone.

Well just a month after the 911 attacks I traveled to Paris to meet my now wife for our first meeting (long story). On her return flight we had gone to the airport to extend her departure a couple of days and she left her back pack in the bathroom and we got on the tram and when I asked her for a drink we realized she had left it but wasn't sure where either there or at the counter where she changed her tickets.

We had to make a long trip around the airport to get back and in the process a guy got on our tram (this was late at night) and he had a shoulder bag but no outward ID that he was any sort of official and I noticed a gun in his open bag and asked if he was a cop which he smartly quipped "yes I am, so what of it?"

I replied that having a concealed weapon in the airport these days was an alarming thing to passengers (especially Americans at the time) and that I was wanting to know why he was carrying a gun not knowing he was cop and making my knowledge of his weapon known to him to gage a reaction and also I had a concern for the back pack we had left not just to get it back because it contained my wife's passport but also for the police not to panic and shut down the airport or something over it?

I suggested he call someone on the radio as it was going to be a bit of time before we got back going in circles the way we were at Charles De Gaulle (terrible airport) and he couldn't be bothered and was very unhelpful and quite snooty.

We got back to the bathroom and it wasn't there, we rushed to the counter and it wasn't there either, lost and found was closed so now we we're beginning to panic. There was a rental car counter directly across from the bathroom but no one there the first time we came by so we though it was closed.

When we came back the second time there was a counter person and we looked concerned and asked the girl and she said yes she had it behind her counter. While we were very grateful we couldn't help but think how foolish that was to pick it up and bring it behind her counter and not even notify the police for example.

Moral of the story is that if the minimum security procedures that are in place are not followed at one of the highest alert times then everything else is just a big waste of time, money and personal intrusion as there will always be another hole in the system, it's too big to plug all the holes, it's like putting your finger in a crack in the Hoover dam to plug a leak.....

Something very similar happened here recently in a Bangkok McDonald's and someone left behind a backpack at a time when the country has experienced numerous bombings..

Edited November 14, 2010 by WarpSpeed

[WarpSpeed]

Let's see...2 attempts recently to take down planes....many more in the past several years. If I am on that plane, I want everybody to go through a scan. Too many crazies out there.

On the other hand, it is an invasion of privacy. Not much you can do about it considering the world we live in now. Get use to it...or quit traveling. It ain't gonna change.

Like I said before. We should have 2 planes. One where everything possible is used to protect the passengers, another where you just step in. After a few explosions on the unsecured plane, which line do you think would be empty? Easy answer. The terrorists have won...our lives have changed. No going back.

P.S. I lived in NYC when the WTC was hit. I watched in person while the first tower crash. I worked in those buildings, so this is a bit personal to me. I hope you can understand that. It was a life changing event for sure. If the current security measures had been in place back then, many thousands would still be alive. Do I still deserve a passifier for that? Don't think so...

You do realize, don't you, Craig, that the "authorities" had numerous opportunities to catch the Saudi perpetrators of the 9-11 attack without using any security theater measures? It is a matter of allocating resources properly. The "authorities" can spend their time hassling innocent travellers (99.99% of all travellers), or they can spend their time on those who are actually a threat (00.01% of all travellers). My version of logic demands the latter. The version of security that you are advocating is akin to draining an entire lake in order to catch one fish.

On this matter, we will have to respectfully disagree. I will not get used to this. And I will not quit traveling. I do feel heartened to see that pilot and aircrew unions are speaking out against the madness.

Yes, similar example to what I just posted...

[craigt3365]

Let's see...2 attempts recently to take down planes....many more in the past several years. If I am on that plane, I want everybody to go through a scan. Too many crazies out there.

You do realize that both those flights originated outside the U.S. (CDG and AMS, shoe and underwear respectively)? Not sure what good the TSA can do in those cases? (Yes, there is one body scanner at AMS now.)

And "many more" attempts? Citation please.

From Wiki:

On December 21, 2001, Reid attempted to board a flight from Paris, France to Miami, Florida, but his boarding was delayed because his disheveled physical appearance aroused the suspicions of the airline passenger screeners. Reid also did not answer all of their questions, and had not checked any luggage for the transatlantic flight. Additional screening by the French National Police resulted in Reid's being re-issued a ticket for a flight on the following day.[13] He returned to the Paris airport on December 22, 2001, and he boarded American Airlines Flight 63 from Paris to Miami, wearing his special shoes packed with plastic explosives in their hollowed-out bottoms.

Here's looking forward to the "rectal bomber", and the ensuing search techniques. Gamma ray scanners anyone.

Excellent point. Not an easy thing to figure out, these "terrorist" threats. I know for sure it has made air travel no fun any more...just a royal pain...in the ***!!!

[lomatopo]

Let's see...2 attempts recently to take down planes....many more in the past several years. If I am on that plane, I want everybody to go through a scan. Too many crazies out there.

You do realize that both those flights originated outside the U.S. (CDG and AMS, shoe and underwear respectively)? Not sure what good the TSA can do in those cases? (Yes, there is one body scanner at AMS now.)

And "many more" attempts? Citation please.

From Wiki:

On December 21, 2001, Reid attempted to board a flight from Paris, France to Miami, Florida, but his boarding was delayed because his disheveled physical appearance aroused the suspicions of the airline passenger screeners. Reid also did not answer all of their questions, and had not checked any luggage for the transatlantic flight. Additional screening by the French National Police resulted in Reid's being re-issued a ticket for a flight on the following day.[13] He returned to the Paris airport on December 22, 2001, and he boarded American Airlines Flight 63 from Paris to Miami, wearing his special shoes packed with plastic explosives in their hollowed-out bottoms.

Here's looking forward to the "rectal bomber", and the ensuing search techniques. Gamma ray scanners anyone.

Excellent point. Not an easy thing to figure out, these "terrorist" threats. I know for sure it has made air travel no fun any more...just a royal pain...in the ***!!!

Actually I think you missed the point...that Richard Reid stuck out as an obvious threat, should have been denied boarding, and that there was actual probable cause for a search, but...now 3 year olds have to take off their shoes.

U.S. Supreme Court

Brinegar v. United States, 338 U.S. 160 (1949)

MR. JUSTICE JACKSON, dissenting.

The Fourth Amendment states:

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

These, I protest, are not mere second-class rights, but belong in the catalog of indispensable freedoms. Among deprivations of rights, none is so effective in cowing a population, crushing the spirit of the individual, and putting terror in every heart. Uncontrolled search and seizure is one of the first and most effective weapons in the arsenal of every arbitrary government.

[craigt3365]

Yes it was personal to me too since my sister in law should have been on the 96th floor of tower 2 at that time. Fortunately for her she was late to work that day and didn't even know what happened until family and friends called her. But they have sorted this threat now and JFYI we'll always be behind the curve and they will always be changing the rules until we have no freedoms left what-so-ever just as they recently did with the cargo planes a line needs to be drawn. In the mean time we are jumping through all of their hoops like trained monkeys and throwing good money after bad to try to head them off & I for one resent it and reject it...

How many nutters that pose a possible risk to you do you think you walk past on a daily basis and now add any terrorist that thinks just because of your nationality that you're fair game and do you stay at home under the covers hiding or hire a full time 24 hour security guard or do you just continue to live your life?

Exactly!!! This is no difference then the chances of being that one in a million victim or on that one in a million plane that crashes without terrorist intervention and is no greater then every day life, the only difference is that you just give up YOUR freedom to fly and travel without personal affronts... IMO those that are that insecure should just stay home, that's equal to you or anyone saying that I or anyone else has something to hide for our displeasure and protest over these personal intrusions and losses of freedoms and IF we don't accept them we should just travel some other way or stay home we have every right that you do without being guilted into capitulation......

Understood and agree. It sucks. I'm not advocating giving up my freedom nor yours, but have some safeguards in place that can help secure OUR freedom. Freedom to fly without having to worry about a terrorist threat. Freedom to fly without an invasion of your privacy. I think the latter one is hard to 100% obtain in times like these...unfortunately.

I'm not insecure. 2 years ago I climbed Mt. Kilimanjaro and traveled independently for over 2 months in East Africa. Rwanda, Uganda, Tanzania and Kenya. I was on the border with the DRC the night all hel_l broke loose. A war zone for sure. I was in China for SARS. The Philippines during a major terrorist attack. Bali just after the first attack. I know travel has risks, but why increase them when you don't really have to. Maybe this scanner and pat downs are not the answer, but we have to keep trying so we can travel. Without any safeguards, we would not be able to travel at all. Think if everybody could bring a gun on board. Not a great idea for sure.

But I fully understand your concerns. I'm not sure what I'm going to do when I first encounter these machines....

You do realize, don't you, Craig, that the "authorities" had numerous opportunities to catch the Saudi perpetrators of the 9-11 attack without using any security theater measures? It is a matter of allocating resources properly. The "authorities" can spend their time hassling innocent travellers (99.99% of all travellers), or they can spend their time on those who are actually a threat (00.01% of all travellers). My version of logic demands the latter. The version of security that you are advocating is akin to draining an entire lake in order to catch one fish.

On this matter, we will have to respectfully disagree. I will not get used to this. And I will not quit traveling. I do feel heartened to see that pilot and aircrew unions are speaking out against the madness.

Yes, I understand for sure. But remember, in the US, if the TSA employs racial profiling, they are in trouble. So they have to search the old, white grandma just like they would a guy wearing a muslim outfit with a t-shirt saying "God Bless Osama Bin Laden".

And the mess was 9/11 was related to a huge screwup among organizations and them not sharing information properly. A government screwup for sure.

But no, I don't think you need to drain the whole lake. Again, as much as possible without cavity searches!!!!!

[QED]

Back to the OP, several people have said that they have them in Seattle, but I flew back from there last week and saw no sign of any scanners.

[Thighlander]

I didn't notice them at LAX in August.

[lomatopo]

14 scanners at SEA; 24 scanners at LAX.

TSA plans to have 450 full-body scanners installed at more than 50 U.S. airports this year at a cost of $130,000 to $170,000 each, paid for with federal stimulus funds.

At least the scanners are American-made.

And for those who dislike big Government don't forget about those 60,000 TSA employees and $10 billion annual budget. I'd hate to see the unemployment figures without the TSA.

FWIW.. Every passenger does not go through the scanner, the system would bog down and flights would be delayed, canceled. The TSA randomly chooses pax for the WTMD (walk through metal detector) or scanner, if is on-line. Some say that young, attractive females get randomly chosen for the nud_e body scanner more often than others.

Edited November 14, 2010 by lomatopo

[Tinkelbell]

All I can say is I am glad you aren't flying the same route I do.

If you don't want to co-operate with the security measures implemented to stop innocent people being killed just get the bus.

Same sentiment here.

For me it never been an issue even before the 9/11.

In 1996 while at the Cairo airpor for TWA's flight home to New York, at the security check-in, they ( the Egjyptian worker) asked me to step out, then they called the female worker to escort me to a little enclosed booth few feets away, once inside, that female put her both hands patting down my whole body, once cleared, I was on my way to board my flight.

I'd rather to have the TSA doing their job like patting down my body ( one whole piece) than picking up my mangled pieces of my remains from the site of the plane crashed caused by the terrorists.

I also like ' craig3365' (post #69) proposal about separating those who DO NOT want to be scanned, and put these people together on the same plane. They can have all the freedom they want without bringing the rest of us down along with them.

[craigt3365]

All I can say is I am glad you aren't flying the same route I do.

If you don't want to co-operate with the security measures implemented to stop innocent people being killed just get the bus.

Same sentiment here.

For me it never been an issue even before the 9/11.

In 1996 while at the Cairo airpor for TWA's flight home to New York, at the security check-in, they ( the Egjyptian worker) asked me to step out, then they called the female worker to escort me to a little enclosed booth few feets away, once inside, that female put her both hands patting down my whole body, once cleared, I was on my way to board my flight.

I'd rather to have the TSA doing their job like patting down my body ( one whole piece) than picking up my mangled pieces of my remains from the site of the plane crashed caused by the terrorists.

I also like ' craig3365' (post #69) proposal about separating those who DO NOT want to be scanned, and put these people together on the same plane. They can have all the freedom they want without bringing the rest of us down along with them.

I think you hit the nail on the head! Full body searches by gorgeous gals...or guys for women. The line would be out the door!!!! Can I be first? Maybe I will even hide something just for fun.

[kpmsprtd]

All I can say is I am glad you aren't flying the same route I do.

If you don't want to co-operate with the security measures implemented to stop innocent people being killed just get the bus.

Same sentiment here.

For me it never been an issue even before the 9/11.

In 1996 while at the Cairo airpor for TWA's flight home to New York, at the security check-in, they ( the Egjyptian worker) asked me to step out, then they called the female worker to escort me to a little enclosed booth few feets away, once inside, that female put her both hands patting down my whole body, once cleared, I was on my way to board my flight.

I'd rather to have the TSA doing their job like patting down my body ( one whole piece) than picking up my mangled pieces of my remains from the site of the plane crashed caused by the terrorists.

I also like ' craig3365' (post #69) proposal about separating those who DO NOT want to be scanned, and put these people together on the same plane. They can have all the freedom they want without bringing the rest of us down along with them.

Dr. Chopper, is there really a bus from the U.S. or U.K. to Thailand? I can certainly identify your nationality from your flippant response.

Tinkerbell and Craig: Where can I find one of these flights without security theater? I am ready to buy my ticket. I agree that this is an excellent way of making everyone happy.

[IMA_FARANG]

Just for info, I left from JFK in New York on the 11th of November on a flight to Tokyo (Narita). (And then on to Bangkok). I flew Delta Airlines.

They did NOT use a full-body scanner in JFK when I left. We went through the usual take off your shoes and remove your belt, security stuff...but no walk in full-body scanner.

According to what TSA says you have the right to refuse the full-body scan. But if you do then you should expect a full-body pat down search. Don't expect them to be gentle or considerate in that pat down search.

If you feel "uncomfortable" with the full-body scanner, I doubt you will appreaciate the full-body pat down search either.

As the Thai bargirls say,"Up to You".

[lomatopo]

Just for info, I left from JFK in New York on the 11th of November on a flight to Tokyo (Narita). (And then on to Bangkok). I flew Delta Airlines.

They did NOT use a full-body scanner in JFK when I left.

The first scanners went live at JFK on Oct 22 in Terminal 8 with a big show starring DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano; you flew out of Terminal 3. With 9 terminals it may take a few months to fully deploy them at JFK.

As of Nov. 1 the pat-downs have gotten much more aggressive/physical. Note that ~ 25% who go through the scanner still get patted down. And not everyone gets chosen for the scanner. With a peak travel day coming up (esp. for families), Nov 24, you can be sure the scanners will not be heavily used. I expect the TSA will be less aggressive with the pat-downs, especially of minors and elderly, looking to avoid any kind of PR set-back for the new measures.

Also note that the DHS "threat-o-meter" is Orange or High, for all domestic and international flights, which represents a "high risk of terrorist attacks", the second highest category.

Edited November 15, 2010 by lomatopo

[Khun Jean]

....

Like I said before. We should have 2 planes. One where everything possible is used to protect the passengers, another where you just step in. After a few explosions on the unsecured plane, which line do you think would be empty? Easy answer. The terrorists have won...our lives have changed. No going back.

.....

If the one with 'full' security costs 5000US$ for a ticket and the 'unprotected' one 1000US$ i predict the terrorist will target the 'full' security one for more effect, obviously the chance to get at some important people is a lot higher. I would also predict that the 'full' security version will go out of business very quick.

Terrorists did not win, but the US and their followers lost.

Want to fight terrorism, start with being defensive and not offensive, this will avoid the inevitable blowback from fathers who have their wife and children blown to pieces.

[elliss]

....

Like I said before. We should have 2 planes. One where everything possible is used to protect the passengers, another where you just step in. After a few explosions on the unsecured plane, which line do you think would be empty? Easy answer. The terrorists have won...our lives have changed. No going back.

secuity is OTT, a very expensive waste of time and money .

security companies, are making megabucks, out of our fear . :jap:

[lomatopo]

CNN - Don't touch my junk

Don't touch my junk

Should John Tyner Should Worry about More Than His Junk?

(CBS) Should John Tyner - the airline passenger shown resisting a security pat-down in the now-infamous "Don't touch my junk" video - be worried about more than touchy-feely security guards?

A small, but growing, group of scientists is now saying that low levels of radiation emitted by airport body scanners might be the bigger concern - not our naked junk.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration acknowledges that the X-ray technology used in the scanners poses a cancer risk, albeit one they say is "so low it presents an extremely small risk."

Read more: bostonherald.com/news/regional/view.bg?articleid=1297227

[Spee]

"If you touch my junk, I'm going to have you arrested."

This comment got an air traveler in trouble the other day, when he protested that the TSA full body scan and groping full body pat down constitutes a sexual assault. Fair dinkum, methinks!

We can't bust illegal aliens. We can't stereotype. We can't profile. But we can feel up Grandma's saggy boobs and gawk at the the size of John Doe's package in the scanner. And of course, not a peep from the ACLU or any other supposed civil rights organizations.

Talk about an organization turned totally on its ear. Homeland Security. TSA. What a joke.

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2010/nov/14/tsa-ejects-oceanside-man-airport-refusing-security/

Edited November 16, 2010 by Spee

[lomatopo]

Talk about an organization turned totally on its ear. Homeland Security. TSA. What a joke.

I think the DHS/TSA has been surprised by the backlash as they thought they had cowed the public and caused enough fear to basically get us to do anything they want (for example: touch our children in appropriately). They are putting a lot of effort into better PR - although DHS Secretary Napolitano is the worst spokesperson possible (why doesn't she ever go through the scanner? ), and will crank up the fear conversation. What they really need is a huge win, or incident, where they actually catch someone at a check-point using the scanner. And not a government auditor! They have to really find the right kind of person to catch in order to stop the backlash. Then with a single incident they can put down any citizen revolt.

I liked the exchange in the "Don't touch my junk video"...

TSA: "I'm sorry sir but this is not sexual assault."

Pax: "It would be if you weren't the Government."

Edited November 16, 2010 by lomatopo

[lomatopo]

Napolitano 'open' to fliers' gripes over screening

By Charisse Jones, USA TODAY

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said Monday that the agency has an "open ear" to any "adjustments" to security measures in place at the nation's airports, as some groups and individuals continued to call for a boycott of full-body scanning machines that they complain are invasive.

At Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport, Napolitano reiterated points she made in a column published Monday in USA TODAY — that the imaging technology does not violate fliers' privacy.

But, she said, "if there are adjustments we need to make to these procedures as we move forward, we have an open ear. We will listen."

Raed more: http://www.usatoday.com/travel/flights/2010-11-16-airportpatdowns16_ST_N.htm

Edited November 27, 2010 by Maestro
Added link to source.