Hmmm ...
Wasn't that pants bomber convenient.
Discrimination warning over airport body scanners
The equality watchdog has called on the government to explain its plans for the use of body scanners at airports, citing concerns about racial profiling and privacy. This weekend the Equality and Human Rights Commission said it had written to the Home Secretary Alan Johnson to urge the "utmost caution" over such technology. …
This topic is closed for new posts.
"... our overriding obligations to protect peoples' life and *liberty*,"
I don't think that word means what you think it means.
The only thing I need protection from is Government profiling and intrusion into my personal life. That's none of your business.
I'm thinking of patenting clothing where the letters hide messages only backscatter X-Ray machines can pick up: "Pervert" being one of my favourite messages so far, with a sub-millimetre weave mesh in the front of underwear.
Who is left?
"especially members of particular groups including disabled people, older people, children, transgendered people, women and religious groups"
Leaving only able-bodied atheist males in the range 18-65 to be scanned indiscriminately. So that's maybe 15% of the population then...
Totally agree
How can you cite discrimination and then leave out a HUGE demographic because they don't fit a 'preferred' group? Surely this in itself is discriminitive.
Personally I'd like to exercise my right to fly and NOT be photographed naked against my will, along with the earlier-referred individuals.
all except men?
Looking at the list of groups this thing will (apparently) have a negative impact on: old people, children, women ... The only people who won't be "negatively impacted" are men. Presumably if it doesn't have a negative impact on men, the effect must surely be a positive one - how exactly would that come about?
Now, given that males are about 50% of the population, when you remove older ones and younger ones, doesn't that make men from 18-65 a minoirity and therefore worthy of consideration. Or are we simply invisible as an identifiable group?
"Let me tell you internets it's not easy being white"
It's a short list of examples of those groups usually targetted by idiots - hence it says "especially" and not "this only applies to", etc. It is not an exhaustive list.
on constructing an artificial "minority"
>"Now, given that males are about 50% of the population, when you remove older ones and younger ones, doesn't that make men from 18-65 a minoirity and therefore worthy of consideration."
Hey, why stop there; why not also remove the men who aren't whingeing crybaby losers with an unjustified sense of entitlement. Just you left? Not surprised.
IOW, yes, sure "men 18-65" are a minority. Just not an oppressed one. A privileged one. That's why you don't get a fucking medal just for being born, twit.
@"Just not an oppressed one. A privileged one"
This shows your true attitude. You see them as privileged. Thats racism. Yes it works both ways. The people who push equality should apply equality equally, otherwise its not equality, its hypocrisy.
After all hypocrisy results in injustice and inequality for some, which generates anger. Yes it works both ways. Plus before you pull that age old argument about what the British Empire done, you first need to look who controlled the British empire. e.g. the 1832 Reform Act, which even then still only "allowing a total of one out of six adult males to vote". (Before the act, i.e. before 1832, only one adult male in ten had the vote!). e.g.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reform_Act_1832
Therefore what the British Empire done wasn't based on the wishes of the *vast majority* of the British people. The 5 out of 6 men and all women were all subjugated under the ruthless rule of the British Empire elite rulers who didn't listen to them and let them suffer (e.g. dickensian era etc..). (The same ruling elites arrogance we all suffer now). So don't punish everyone for what the rulers done.
The arrogant elite in this country are not the majority and just like throughout history they never listen to the wishes of the vast majority of people. So don't punish many for the actions of a minority who cares only about themselves in power over us all.
@@"Just not an oppressed one. A privileged one"
>"This shows your true attitude. You see them as privileged. Thats racism. "
Nonsense. First off, men aren't a "race". Secondly, I am not claiming that their privilege is a consequence of some shared DNA. Thirdly, I am one, and I find the advantages laid out for us by society blindingly obvious, but maybe that's because I'm not a self-pitying whiner but capable of showing a bit of damn gratitude for my good fortune. Racism is about lumping a bunch of people together and treating them as all the same because of some minor bit of shared genetics; grouping together a bunch of people based on their common economic and social position on the top of the heap is not even vaguely like the same kind of thing.
>"Plus before you pull that age old argument about what the British Empire done, "
WTF are you even talking about? I said nothing about it and wasn't about to go raising ancient history here. You have some kind of chip on your shoulder and you're conversing with it, not me.
Pre-flight checks
This will be abused very quickly.
How long until the first story about: "Airport security chief apologises for x-ray porn torrents"
Why should I care?
As long as that image isn't traceable back to me, why should I care if somebody posts pics of my tiny todger to the torrents? That, and given the huge supply of quality porn available for free on the 'net, I'm pretty sure bootleg security pictures wouldn't be MY first choice of NSFW viewing material!
Equality Watchdog? Get lost
Does anybody want them? Another unelected quango staffed by idiots with no common sense.
Profiling makes perfect sense. My family, consisting of 2 adults and 2 young kids, going on holiday to Florida are blatantly not a threat. The guy with the ticking rucksack is. So why screen us?
You wait - the people who pose an actual terror threat will start screaming that it's against their religion to be viewed on a full-body scanner and so they'll be allowed through without it whilst the rest of us are forced through it. Not that I'd be that bothered by it really. In fact it's a great idea. However somebody will soon find a way around it, they always do.
..unfortunately ...
Given the supremely supine nature of our courts, media, and MPs, we need watchdogs like this ....
Profiling is bullshit, as is your logic
What a load of nonsense. Profiling is a flaw in logical thinking and nothing else. Judging by your last paragraph, you believe only the religious (and I think we can guess where you're going with that) to be a threat to aircraft. Wanna bet?
And I'd love to know why you think this is a great idea. Given that it won't pick up explosives, and at this point in time pretty much detects only what a current scanner does, except visually, what's so great about it?
Re: Equality Watchdog? Get lost
@Valerion: Why?
Because you think terrorists don't have wives and kids?
Or because you think that having successfully procreated automatically clears you of any possible wrong-doing ?
What's so great about it?
From a security POV absolutely nothing. It doesn't even work as a deterent because it's been widely publicised that it won't do what UK.gov tell us it will do.
From a political POV it covers the government's arse for a while. It gives the gullible section of the electorate (tabloid reasers) the impression that the governent is doing something about this "threat". Of course this only works until somebody gets past the scanners with explosives, but they're hoping that this will take long enough that people will have forgotten the promises and they can implement even more draconian measures.
The point about all these "anti-terror" laws is that they are being used more in the fight against "conventional" crime than they are is the fight against terrorism. How many searches carried out in the name of anti-terrorism have actually resulted in terrorists being jailed? Not many. How many of them have resulted in prosecutions being brought for more mundane offences? Quite a lot actually. So IOW these measures are being implement to make the lives of police and customs easier, not as any realistic measure to prevent terrorism.
Re: My family....
So terrorists/bombers start travelling in family groups.
ISTR a soldier in Afghanistan being victim of a bomb where bomber eas woman with babe in arms.
@Valerion
Agree completely with you.
I expect to see an evaporation of idiotic politically correct thinking in favour of hard logic as terrorist threats increase, as they are expected to in the next few years.
@@Valerion: Why?
I'm guessing you're pretty naive. It would make it extremely difficult and hostile for terrorists if profiling was in place. It might not sit quite right with your year 11 style of social philosophy, but that's the truth.
@suspicious git
Terrorists are much less likely to blow up themselves and their own kids, even less so with the home grown and western educated variety which is becoming the main convern. Even if they did, then that information would be added to the profiling criteria.
Note to commentards: Open your eyes and try some original thought for once.
Profiling?
We all know what's going to happen, if you're brown or black you go through the scanner, if you're not then you keep your dignity.
It's all ridiculous.
But we all know what DID happen...
Can't fault the logic if history and fact are anything to go by.
Sept 11: How many white bombers?
Jul 7: How many white bombers?
Just whose side you on anyway?
> Sept 11: How many white bombers?
> Jul 7: How many white bombers?
Objective of Al-Qaeda: Provoke western democracies into persecuting *innocent* muslims in order to gain recruits funds and world-wide sympathy, something that would otherwise be quite difficult for a bunch of murdering psychos to achieve.
Your role in all this: Willing accomplice.
God, that's the stupidest thing I've ever read
"Can't fault the logic if history and fact are anything to go by.
Sept 11: How many white bombers?
Jul 7: How many white bombers?"
Gah! What the ****? What, were those the only bombings in history? Were there no terrorist attacks at all before 2001? Or are you full of shit?
OK, here's a response: How about "how many bombers?" We've been successfully attacked ONCE in this so called "war." Excuse me while I shit my pants. As tragic as the London attacks were, are they really worth all this?
Hmmm
It's been discussed in another article that the X-Ray scanners won't stop a committed bomber, but I'm bored from hearing statements like this :
"The Commission yesterday warned Johnson that discrimination on racial or religious grounds is illegal."
Why is discrimination on religious grounds illegal (I agree with racial discrimination being a bit shit)? I thought it was pretty clear that the folks who want to kill western people/any non-muslim (this time round) are Islamists? Why can't they/shouldn't they receive a bit more attention?
Race/religion
Never has a name been so apt. How do you propose to identify Islamists? Or are you assuming they all look the same and "a bit Muslim"?
I'm getting a bit bored of the claims of it being Islamists fault. To quote the West Wing:
Islamic extremist is to Islam as the KKK is to Christianity
Thank you...
The KKK comparison is valid, but it goes further than that.
That suicide bombing is allowed, or even mandated, by the Koran is a massive misinterpretation of the relevant text. According to any reasonable teachings of the Koran anybody who practices or condones suicide bombing is, by definition, not a Muslim.
Oh and by the way was the nail bomb maker jailed last week a Muslim?
The Koran talks about bombs?
I suggest a text that was written 1200 years ago doesn't mention the words bomb or bombing!
@ RunGrentodd
Actually wasn't there a bit about how to deport oneself in the deep end of the water hole?
Grrr!
Sod the PC crap, can we please use our brains. I'm sorry but our current terrorist threat comes from religious extremists who are generally non-white.
Back when the IRA were attacking the UK mainland, people with Irish names or Irish car registrations would be stopped more frequently. This was common sense, but these day we can't use the same sense as those determined to blow us up just happen to be from a different ethnic group.
If this PC crap continues to hamper and restrict investigations it won't be long before black women are being asked for DNA to assist in the investigation of a rape where the suspect was described as a white male, purely because focusing on white males would be profiling...
A better way
People are only willing to die for a cause if they feel their lives on this mortal coil are worthless, hopeless and devoid of joy. If they were happy bunnies, with something to look forward to and a sense of contentment they wouldn't feel the need to kill themselves and those around them.
The solution in this case would be not to bomb them back to the stone age - which takes away any material comforts and aspirations they may foster and makes it even harder to drag themselves back to prosperity. Instead we should be air-dropping white goods, happy-meals, air conditioning, HDTVs (complete with all the "western" channels). Installing sanitation, bowling alleys, reliable water, shopping malls, 24*7 electricity and schools - most of all schools.
That way they'll become just as dumb, fat and happy (to coin a phrase) as the rest of us so when the small number of true fanatics tries to stir up hatred, they'll fail because all the potential candidates will be too busy staying in with their loved ones watching Big Brother. You never know after a generation or two, they might even start buying the same old crap as the rest of us - thus assuring a larger market for our exports.
Common sense is what tells you the Earth is flat.
>"Back when the IRA were attacking the UK mainland, people with Irish names or Irish car registrations would be stopped more frequently. This was common sense"
It may seem "common sense" to bigots and idiots, but it was utterly ineffective and is now regarded by military political and historical analysts as a disastrous and failed strategy. Randomly harrassing people on the street? Needle in a haystack, you'd need a million policemen for this imbecilic utterly untargeted scattergun waste of human resources approach to achieve anything. And morons like you think it worked really well and we should do it again, just because it soothes your preconceived ignorant biases. "Oh, go find someone who looks vaguely like that bad guy and beat him up instead" - yeah, that's real Sherlock Holmes work there, that's really gonna help. Not.
Political Correctness gone mad!!!
You might want to mull for a few months on how pretty much without exception the crux of the argument of everyone who makes this complaint is that they want to go back to when they could disparage minorities and it was all just passed off as a bit of fun.
Re: Political Correctness gone mad!!!
Not at all, please don't try to tar me with any bigot brush, it won't stick.
Did the lorry drivers in Yorkshire complain when they were getting regularly stopped during the hunt for the Yorkshire ripper, because the profile suggested he was a lorry driver? Did they scream that no lorry drivers were being stopped in Kent? Did they demand bus drivers be stopped too? No, they understood the logic and the need to find him.
If an Englishman is suspected of a crime when I am on abroad, and the cops decide to question me, will I scream that no French people are being picked up? No, don't be stupid, I'd understand the logic.
Would I expect the local cops to waste their time picking up Germans, French, Poles and Spaniards just to make me feel better? No, I'd rather they found the person they were looking for.
I see
Either you don't understand the language, or are too emotionally fraught to read rather than interpret.
Not just muslims though
Recently had a brief from what used to be called "Special Branch", regarding the current threats. It may surprise you that they say that we are as much at risk from white supremacists these days, who are out to attack muslims, as we are from muslims.
Get a dog to do it.
Total waste of money. Dogs do a better job than these multi million pound scanners and they are very cheap; working for a bounce of a ball.
Put collection boxes in the airports
If there are enough donations to fund a scanner and someone to look at the images then fine. People are welcome to spend their own money on a false sense of security.
discrimination on racial or religious grounds is illegal
>discrimination on racial or religious grounds is illegal
That may be so but given that the current threat is from extremist muslims then you don't need a double digit IQ to figure out who should be singled out for further checks. I know that the majority of Muslims are decent law abiding citizens but they don't help themselves by not denouncing the extremists in their midst more vociferously. The security services have a hard enough time as it is without having waste it by screeing someone who is unlikely to be a terrorist just to even out the ethnic quota.
Re: discrimination on racial or religious grounds is illega
Sure, but you can't see from the outside if someone is muslim or not, therefor profiling based on the perceived ethnicity or religion of someone is illegal. Even that white anglo-saxon managerial type over there could be a muslim. Or a terrorist from another denomination. Or someone whose childeren were kidnapped and now he has to commit a terrorist attack to keep them alive (there is probably some B or C movie with that plot). Or....
The 'best' terrorist are those you wouldn't have expected.
In other words: profiling is usually bullshit and does not help, it just singles out a limited group of people with no other gain than playing security theater for the masses.
Re: Avalanche
You are right to a certain extent. If the target knows what your criteria for profiling are then they will seek to be anything other than that. However, in the case of Muslims their name is a bit of a give away. Even the home grown disilusioned white terrorist, or your example of a suit, upon converting to Islam will take a Muslim name.
Yes.
"The 'best' terrorist are those you wouldn't have expected." - like the best malware is the stuff that gets past everything. But most people want to believe nothing can get past their scanner, don't they. I guess the bollockheads in power trust the Symantec/McAfee/Microsoft scanner on their laptop/desktop 100% too.
@Valerion
The perfect family is actually also the best target for extremists to try and recruit.
How soon before the perfect son is strapping the bomb on?
There's a whole world of home grown terror out there.
Exactly, @Valerion...
... but also:
1) "Terrorists" or "extremists" are not a fixed, well defined group. Ordinary, law-abiding moderates can be turned into extremists. If they experience extreme injustice, or see injustice inflicted on people with whom they identify, they become angry. If they are then made to feel excluded from the mainstream, then perhaps they become receptive to the argument that violence is the only way.
2) The likelihood is that the profiling will be done on appearance (i.e. skin colour). This means that the white convert who attends the meetings of an extreme group will walk through without challenge, while respectable Muslim community leaders, Sikhs, Hindus and so on will be being targeted.
3) It will lead to neglect of the potential of people from other groups to commit violence, and so possiby increase the risk we face:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/south_east/8459125.stm
http://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/news/Batley-BNP-man-jailed-over.5986696.jp
I will stop flying....
...from UK airports if these come in. I'd rather at 2 hours and £60 to go to Paris.
If you would object to a strip search, you should object to these scanners. Simple as that.
Disabilities discrimination
I for one will fight against this new technology... I wear a bag on my side due to problems at birth - this bag collects urine and holds MUCH more than the 100ml allowed for liquids.
So far I've only ever been questioned once during a pat-down search and my explanation was accepted without question.
I can see that when these scanners come into play I'll be stopped every freaking time and asked to provide samples etc...
Medical Pouches
My gf has a similar condition only her bag is internal with a small opening in her side that she catheterises. We will be flying for the first time since she had this op in about 10 days.
Since most doctors haven't heard of her condition or recent operations I'm dreading the reaction of airport security when they see the large quantities of drugs, dressings, catheters wrapped in a plastic bag with a sterilising gel, etc in her hand luggage. She must have some of these items in her hand luggage in case she needs to use them during our time in the airport or on the flight.
Common sense?
"Back when the IRA were attacking the UK mainland, people with Irish names or Irish car registrations would be stopped more frequently. This was common sense,"
It may be common sense as you call it but it was a total failure. Manchester, Guildford, Horse Guards Parade, Canary Wharf, etc etc all on the mainland. Real fsckin' bombs with real explosives, not the nonsense people cower from today. The IRA bombing stopped when a political solution was found to a political problem. No bombing Dublin back into the stone age requiired. Not that it would ever happen because the IRA were white terrorists and there are lots of Irish in America with good connections.
Still, the terrorists now know they do not need real bombs, just something that 'common sense' says could, in someone's febrile imagination, be a bomb. So we have full body scanning. What happens after the next scare? Body cavity searches? Funnny, some corporation already makes a machine to do that, might be a good time to buy shares in it. What about after that? Stripped naked and sedated for flight, etc, etc.
Thank you AJP Taylor...
"No bombing Dublin back into the stone age required"
That's because 'the west' don't want to control the worlds Potato reserves (and had no problem with southern Ireland in any case).
Let's not confuse the 'War on Terror' with the real reason we are bombing the sh1t out of the middle east right now.
Nonsense
The scanners, I mean.
The 9/11 attacks had no explosives involved at all, the planes were the weapon.
The Lockerbie bomb, was in a suit-case, in the hold (and on the plane through other countries before reaching UK soil).
The only attempts at bombing that I can think of, that involved explosives being taken physically on board, were the "shoe" bomber and the "pants" bomber. Neither of which boarded a plane in the UK.
Correct
...and also - the shoe bomber was a white bloke called Richard Reid, I can't see how profiling would have helped much there.
This topic is closed for new posts.
Popular Whitepapers
- The BI Inflexion Point
Information is a right, not a privilege - Risk and Resilience
The application availability gamble - Register Research on: Agile development - is it right for you
Reaping the benefits of modern software practice - The Register Guide to managing spam
A primer on the implications for enterprise IT - The Register Guide to email security
A primer on the challenges of securing email and approaches to resolving them - High Performance for All
Responding to the needs of compute-intensive workloads
