These security techniques, the naked body scanners and the invasive pat downs, have begun a flash point of controversy in the US. My understanding is that other countries use these techniques as well. So why not a poll? Indeed.

The third vote 'given a choice' I put null vote.....reason: if both pat down and scan are required to improve safety on my flight .....that would be my choice

whatever it takes to improve safety

I have no objections, think they provide some increase in security, and until they stop this silliness about not being able to be patted down by the opposite sex, I'll take the scanner.

whatever it takes to improve safety

So when they catch a terrorist with a bomb up his butt, and use him as a reason for conducting cavity searches (since the backscatter xrays don't look inside the body), you'll be in line bent over waiting your turn?

I have no objections, think they provide some increase in security, and until they stop this silliness about not being able to be patted down by the opposite sex, I'll take the scanner.

It does make being gay an obvious advantage ------ until you look at the people doing the pat-downs.

The idea that you have the right to fly by public carrier with limited security precautions being taken should have died in everybodies minds in 2001.

So, basically, the terrorists won. The public, especially the American public has been made to exist in a perpetual state of fear and paranoia and actively willing to forfeit their civil rights based on the actions of a tiny number of villains.

So, basically, the terrorists won. The public, especially the American public has been made to exist in a perpetual state of fear and paranoia and actively willing to forfeit their civil rights based on the actions of a tiny number of villains.

Yep no need to fight the inevitable anymore, just giving yourself over to Allah is all that's left to be done .. and BTW though we keep giving them more and more rights like the trial that just happened in New York and the settlement that Britain just made with the Guantanamo detainees.. It would be farcical if it weren't so serious ...

So, basically, the terrorists won. The public, especially the American public has been made to exist in a perpetual state of fear and paranoia and actively willing to forfeit their civil rights based on the actions of a tiny number of villains.

No

Basically the travellers won. They are still able to travel the world. There never was a right to use a public carrier without restriction, those restrictions have just been beefed up as a result of the world changing. There may be a time when bomb detection and weapon detection is foolproof and non-invasive at all. That day hasn't arrived yet and until then we all must bend to the realities of life in the 21st century. If you want to avoid a body-scanner or a pat-down the answer is simple. Don't fly with a common carrier. Hop on a slow boat, drive, etc.

Again, the right to fly in a common carrier without satisfying security requirements is not a garaunteed right.

In any case, the debate sides are well framed, but you've got to know that the terrorists upon viewing the latest humiliations the "Great Satans" are willingly lining up for are laughing their heads off that they had such a huge impact with such a small investment in money and people.

In any case, the debate sides are well framed, but you've got to know that the terrorists upon viewing the latest humiliations the "Great Satans" are willingly lining up for are laughing their heads off that they had such a huge impact with such a small investment in money and people.

The impact was felt about the time the second plane hit in NYC. The cost to the world economies was enormous. The cost to people's feeling of security was huge! Even in Denver Colorado they barricaded the WTC building there by 10am NYC time. Laughing? I doubt they are laughing too much. The world certainly lined up against them and they have had little success since then. They are hiding and actively hunted.

As for humiliation ... I have nothing to be ashamed of by a full body scan Much of the world accepts casual nudity and would not be shocked by the idea. Only the prudish ultra-uptight people of the world are upset about a possible invasion of privacy by a body scan.

A right wing opinion that I largely agree with for a change. This is mostly security theater, not real security --

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/18/AR2010111804494.html

But we must not bring that up. We pretend that we go through this nonsense as a small price paid to ensure the safety of air travel. Rubbish. This has nothing to do with safety - 95 percent of these inspections, searches, shoe removals and pat-downs are ridiculously unnecessary. The only reason we continue to do this is that people are too cowed to even question the absurd taboo against profiling - when the profile of the airline attacker is narrow, concrete, uniquely definable and universally known. So instead of seeking out terrorists, we seek out tubes of gel in stroller pouches.

The part I disagree with is the implication that profiling should be based on nationality, etc. only. I think it needs to be a lot more sophisticated than that.

There are reports in the US now that when there is a choice offered, scanner vs. invasive pat down and the choice is made to be pat down, that there is a PUNITIVE aspect to the pat down. In other words, the operators are strongly implying there is something wrong with people who choose the pat down and there is a sadistic element to their actions. At the very least, those operators are the ones who need to be punished for abuse of their petty powers, not the innocent traveling civilians.

A right wing opinion that I largely agree with for a change. This is mostly security theater, not real security --

http://www.washingto...0111804494.html

But we must not bring that up. We pretend that we go through this nonsense as a small price paid to ensure the safety of air travel. Rubbish. This has nothing to do with safety - 95 percent of these inspections, searches, shoe removals and pat-downs are ridiculously unnecessary. The only reason we continue to do this is that people are too cowed to even question the absurd taboo against profiling - when the profile of the airline attacker is narrow, concrete, uniquely definable and universally known. So instead of seeking out terrorists, we seek out tubes of gel in stroller pouches.

So ... the person you quote ays 95% are ridiculously unnecessary ------ meaning that 5% are? That is a ratio of 1 in 20 ..... think that through again 5% are necessary! That makes the rest tolerable to any sane person. History in MANY places have shown us that some people are willing to use children and the elderly as weapons and that nobody can be truly ruled out on casual inspection ....

While I wouldn't allow the police to search my personal vehicle in the USA without a warrant, I would be a fool to think that I have the same rights on a common carrier concerning my person or baggage.

You read that completely wrong. He means, and totally clearly, that about five percent of the public should be subject to invasive search procedures, not everyone. That they should be selected based on actual rational criteria. I also feel you go way too far to imply that people who are questioning the extreme airport security procedures in the US are all irrational.

Good grief Jing, humiliations.....invasive.....they're just security checks to try and avoid a potential disaster.........if these actions do not sit well with the civil liberties group, then I suggest as a few others have, this group of people who are so easily humiliated and find the pat downs so invasive don't bother to fly........because these type of self important, complaining idiots, have the potential to create the openings for terrorist actions......which the terrorists will no doubt find very amusing!

Do I recall similar outcry regarding the use of seatbelts?

None of these scanning procedures do ANYTHING to detect certain kinds of explosives. I favor real security. Using sniffer dogs, profiling and database mining, and Israeli questioning methods. Not this current farce.

Do I recall similar outcry regarding the use of seatbelts?

Not related at all.

None of these scanning procedures do ANYTHING to detect certain kinds of explosives. I favor real security. Using sniffer dogs, profiling and database mining, and Israeli questioning methods. Not this current farce.

The scans can attempt to detect the various components and mechanisms required to initiate the explosion.........

Do I recall similar outcry regarding the use of seatbelts?

Not related at all.

Of course not........

A measure introduced and enforced in the everyday public arena for the good of the public.............raised an outcry in some circles

Has subsequently saved lives, injury and maiming of thousands of people

not related at all...... .

whatever it takes to improve safety

So when they catch a terrorist with a bomb up his butt, and use him as a reason for conducting cavity searches (since the backscatter xrays don't look inside the body), you'll be in line bent over waiting your turn?

Jingthing suggests Using sniffer dogs, profiling and database mining, and Israeli questioning methods. That might work. If the dog goes for your butt you are in big trouble. I doubt if they could stick a bomb up there dry so maybe have the dogs sniff for lubricant of some kind?

Personally I have gotten used to being patted down since I have lived in Thailand for six years and go into those kinds of bars. But maybe I am not the norm. I don't even jump anymore. At first I would jump when people grabbed my crotch but after a while I realized they were just being friendly. Maybe it is the same at the airport. If the people smiled while they patted you down and made affirmative noises it might help.

You know it is just a matter of time before someone realizes the potential of this thing and some guy goes through the scanner with metallic a skin tight g string and stockings. Have the camera crew there with video recording the reaction of the scanners.

Where is the evidence the US style screenings have saved lives? The more recent attack attempts were thwarted by incompetent terrorists and/or brave passengers ON THE PLANE.

I don't see it as the terrorists winning. They tried to make us fear flying and we just adapted to it with a different attitude toward security and went on with things. If we let them freak us out about it, then they may have won a few points.

Where is the evidence the US style screenings have saved lives? The more recent attack attempts were thwarted by incompetent terrorists and/or brave passengers ON THE PLANE.

Deterrent Jing........the idea is to stop the loss of life before it occurs.......not wait for six of seven successful bombings before introduction.......

The Israeli method is also a deterrent and demonstrably works better than the US methods. and doesn't involve subjecting EVERYONE irrationally to the same invasive methods. If you don't think naked body scanners and genital/breast rubbings are invasive, well, we aren't speaking the same language. This issue isn't going away, and one of the big drivers of this is going to be about the treatment of innocent children. This is bad enough for adults.

If you want to subject your body to X- Ray radiation everytime you go through an airport then go ahead. Not me.

Read more here:

http://www.newscient...reveal-all.html

I agree on the Israeli method, but not as a complete solution. As for children, people hide drugs on them, why wouldn't they hide a weapon or explosive?

Of course we are not speaking the same language Jing

Mine is the voice of reason.......

Where is the evidence the US style screenings have saved lives? The more recent attack attempts were thwarted by incompetent terrorists and/or brave passengers ON THE PLANE.

Hmmm trying to prove a negative are we?

Where is the proof that the enhanced measures have not prevented the attempts? We do have evidence that the attempts may have changed from passenger flights to cargo flights. Might not the enhanced security measures be a reason for that? We also have evidence that international intelligence agencies are working together in a better way than in the past etc.

We will have to take the fact that what you earlier labelled as a very successful (in terms of $$ and manpower) act of terrorism is just not very repeatable under the new safety regulations.

The very fact that these regulations are being imposed seems to counter the fear of air travel that was generated after 9-11.

I think people should opt (when a choice if offered) for the pat down, and a public pat down. That way, the public can witness many times what our government is doing to its people, when there are much less totalitarian methods that are actually more effective in meeting the security goal. I don't see this controversy going away ever unless major changes are made. There is major support for an adjustment to these policies coming from both the right and the left.

By the way, as the failed presidential attempt of "Mr. 911" Rudy Giuliani proves, just mentioning 911 doesn't have the same power it used to. People want rational solutions, not continued reminders of fear and dread. Playing the 911 card repeatedly becomes rather nauseating.

So,

Is Jingthing going to lead a revolution against airport security measures (in the USA) from Thailand?

Jing --- YOU mentioned how effective in terms of manpower and money that 9-11 was for the terrorists. Others have pointed out that since then there have been no successful repeats of that event. Attributable in part, to enhanced security measures. That people are still flying, traveling, vacationing, going on business trips show to many of us that the terrorists did NOT win anything. They died, They killed people. They saw countries harboring them attacked etc.

I will personally, happily, walk through a body scanner any time I need to fly. I have nothing to hide and nothing to be ashamed of. I recognize that the world has changed (just like it changed after a rash of hijackings in the 70's --- but with better technology!)

I do, however, look forward to the next advancement in technology that makes the current ways of doing things obsolete. The way that metal detectors have been made obsolete by plastics and ceramics.