Body scan vs pat-down

Dennie Quill, Contributor

SOME AMERICANS are furious about the invasive full-body scanners which are being installed in more than 450 commercial airports in that country. New security measures in the United States rely on high-tech full-body scanners or, if refused, more aggressive pat downs. And although polls indicate that 81 per cent of Americans are OK with the new measures, there are many, including privacy-advocacy groups, who are unhappy about these measures.

Reports of protest action have been growing over the last three weeks when the measures were introduced. A male passenger stripped down to his boxers, saying he was "felt-up" the week before and he wanted to avoid a repeat. Another passenger punched a transportation security officer as he was being patted down. And this protest is expected to be stepped up Wednesday when millions of Americans will travel across the length and breadth of the country for Thanksgiving celebrations. Some protesters have opted not to fly, others say they will arrive at airports in kilts and no underwear and others have vowed to stage nude protests.

Targets

The radiation scanners are being feared for health reasons while people are justifiably angry about the enhanced pat downs. Target area? The breasts, inner thighs, genitals and buttocks. This is an obvious response to the Nigerian who attempted to blow up an airline last Christmas by hiding a bomb in his underwear. It is a fact that airport security has been more reactive than thoughtful. Box cutters were used in 9/11 attacks, so everything down to nail clips were banned. Because of the famous shoe bomber passengers now have to take off their shoes, including sandals, to have them scanned, and since a terrorist in the United Kingdom was working with liquids, even water is banned. I pray that no terrorist seizes the idea of placing a bomb in a body cavity for I can't imagine what the reaction would be.

It's not likely that body scanners will become commonplace in European airports anytime soon. The Europeans say they rely more on pre-flight intelligence by studying computer records and questioning passengers. Security personnel in Europe and America have a disagreement. The Europeans suggest that such invasive procedures are not the last line of defence, while director of the Trans-portation Security Administration, John Pistole, said they are the most-effective last line of defence.

But it is important to note that neither the shoe bomber nor the underwear bomber was detected by high-tech measures. Instead, it was alert passengers and crew members who took them down. So will these scanning machines make flying any safer? I guess only time will tell.

In the aftermath of the failed Christmas bombing, former Home-land Security Chief Michael Chertoff gave scores of media interviews, advocating the need for the Federal government to acquire more scanners for American airports. He argued that scanners would have picked up such a device last Christmas.

The companies that built these scanners spent some $300 million in the last five years to get lobbyist to advance their cause in Washington. Chertoff, who now heads Chertoff Group, a security consulting firm, is a paid lobbyists for Rapiscan, the leading global supplier of security-inspection solutions. A year ago, Rapiscan Security Products, Inc., won $173 million in Homeland Security contracts to manufacture and install scanners at American airports. The more I turn this over in my mind, the more I am amazed at the way business is conducted in Washington, DC.

Send feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com or denniequill@hotmail.com

It is important to note that neither the shoe bomber nor the underwear bomber was detected by high-tech measures. Instead, it was alert passengers and crew members who took them down. So will these scanning machines make flying any safer? I guess only time will tell.