Women banned from flight for refusing scan

It blows my mind how people think THEY can dictate how others run their own companies. Bottom line is these companies set their own rules and guidlines...they owe you or me NOTHING, and we CHOOSE to use their service..i.e. follow their rules....how is this so hard to get, and better yet what basis is your anger on?

Do I think its over the top, sure, but again the rules aren't mine to make since I don't own the planes or airline. For those of you pissed off...get together and buy a few planes, start an new airline and set your own rules and regs...problem solved....until then, we have no place telling PRIVATE companies how they should operate just because we don't like their way of doing things.

Control, control bloody control. They already had plans to install these things and were just waiting for a chance to implement them. It's about grinding you down and making you feel powerless in nearly every circumstance, all on the hyped up and ridiculously overblown threat of terrorists. I have the luxury of simply sticking the middle finger up and not flying. Im not really partial to foreign holidays and don't need to fly for work etc But many people do not have that luxury. Good on these woman, i'd like to think more people would follow their actions, but i know they won't.

I caught the following quote in the London Guardian:

Last month, Lord Adonis stressed that an interim code of practice on the use of body scanners stipulated that passengers would not be selected “on the basis of personal characteristics”.

He said that images captured by body scanners would be immediately deleted after the passenger had gone through and that security staff were appropriately trained and supervised.

I wonder if his "Lordship" missed all of the parroting defenders of this tyranny unequivically stating that the machines were 'incapable' of saving ANY images? Obviously not as his statement above suggests that the machines do save the images but "trust us," we'll delete them.

I would never go near one of these despicable x-ray blasters and I have refused to fly ANYWHERE since all of their ridiculous 9/11 crap because I refuse to be treated like herd animal sheep bording a tube. It is too bad there are not more people willing to stand up to this insanity. It would be better for everyone.

You want to keep aircraft safe from "terrorists?" PROFILE the would-be terrorist like the Jews do.

Thanks for the post. Flag/Star





[edit on 3/3/2010 by waycoolsnoopy]

Any who goes for medical treatment, tests, routine check-ups has to get X-rayed. The world hasn't fallen apart because of this invasion of privacy, nude pictures aren't circulating, people don't feel violated.

Adults who actually are troubled something so innocuous are no doubt looking for things to have issue with.

I have no sympathy for whiners.

Originally posted by mmiichael
Any who goes for medical treatment, tests, routine check-ups has to get X-rayed.

These machines are NOT xrays. Xrays show bones not naked people. These machines show what is under the clothes... ie NUDE.

Originally posted by rcwj1975
It blows my mind how people think THEY can dictate how others run their own companies. Bottom line is these companies set their own rules and guidlines...they owe you or me NOTHING, and we CHOOSE to use their service..i.e. follow their rules....how is this so hard to get, and better yet what basis is your anger on?

Do I think its over the top, sure, but again the rules aren't mine to make since I don't own the planes or airline. For those of you pissed off...get together and buy a few planes, start an new airline and set your own rules and regs...problem solved....until then, we have no place telling PRIVATE companies how they should operate just because we don't like their way of doing things.

I beg to differ. WE keep those businesses in business. Without US, they don't make money. Without US, they cease to exist, so I think we DO have a right as customers to tell them what we do and don't want.

By the way, as far as I understand it, the government has been pushing these airports to install them anyway, so is it a matter of company policy, or a too-big-for-its-knickers government putting their nose in where it doesn't belong?

Originally posted by truthseeker1984
I beg to differ. WE keep those businesses in business. Without US, they don't make money. Without US, they cease to exist, so I think we DO have a right as customers to tell them what we do and don't want.

Sorry that just doesn't cut it. Just because we use THEIR service doesn't give us ANY right to tell them how to operate. Do you tell wal-mart what to set their prices at? Do you tell your local club who to hire as a bouncer? The bottom line is, its their company to run how they choose. If they lose all their customers, thats on them, and then MAYBE they will see and say hmmmm, we need to reevaluate.

By the way, as far as I understand it, the government has been pushing these airports to install them anyway, so is it a matter of company policy, or a too-big-for-its-knickers government putting their nose in where it doesn't belong?

Even if the government did recommend them (to make money I'm sure), the private airlines paid for them, not tax payers, so it really don't matter if the companies take GOV advice....

I'm not entirely sure of this... but are we sure that it is the airlines that even dictate this? Wouldn't it be whoever owns the airport?

Just because one carrier says "we won't subject you to the scan" does not mean you won't have to scan. It is up to the airport.

Most cities only have ONE airport which means we don't get to choose. In this case, flying is a right BECAUSE we cannot choose to take a bus over seas. We only have ONE option.

You only have to buy products at Wal-mart prices IN WAL-MART. You can still choose to go to another store.

Airports you cannot.

Originally posted by SilentShadow

Originally posted by mmiichael
Any who goes for medical treatment, tests, routine check-ups has to get X-rayed.

These machines are NOT xrays. Xrays show bones not naked people. These machines show what is under the clothes... ie NUDE.

You go to a doctor you often have to remove some or all your clothes.
Skin is routinely examined sometimes breasts, sex organs and other orifices. It's not sexual in context, just procedural.

If you can't handle this sort of thing don't travel. You obviously have some sort of problem.

Getting blown up, losing limbs, eyes, 3rd degree burns, lifetime incapacitation. That is what this is trying to prevent.

Sorry, I have little sympathy for this non-issue.

Originally posted by Carseller4
There is no right to fly on a airplane.

Don't like it?

Take a bus.

Liberty is most certainly a natural right. Security, on the other hand, isn't. If you don't like freedom move to communist China, and take your virtual strip search machines with you.

[edit on 3-3-2010 by Crito]

reply to post by stumason


It could be made by machines in a factory, sorta like the Venus Project talks about. Flight does not have to cost that much. The only reason it coast so much is because anti gravity and free energy have been surpressed. The flying saucers are easy to maintain. Sure in the current society somebody owns the plane, but just because you own something does not mean that it is right. What if someone owened ALL the land and waters and they did not want you on it, what would you say then? Would you defend their right of ownership?
Huh?

Originally posted by SilentShadow
I'm not entirely sure of this... but are we sure that it is the airlines that even dictate this? Wouldn't it be whoever owns the airport?

Just because one carrier says "we won't subject you to the scan" does not mean you won't have to scan. It is up to the airport.

Most cities only have ONE airport which means we don't get to choose. In this case, flying is a right BECAUSE we cannot choose to take a bus over seas. We only have ONE option.

You only have to buy products at Wal-mart prices IN WAL-MART. You can still choose to go to another store.

Airports you cannot.

The airport owner is still private. Is the airports you know of tax based? No, which means you have NO RIGHT to tell them how to run THEIR show. Just because there is water between this place and the next doesn't just give you rights to make PRIVATE business adhear to your request. They were smart enough back in the day to see OTHERS may want to fly across the ocean, so hey, they built some planes and said here you go...PAY ME and I"LL provide you a service. The lack of options also DOESN'T give you a right to demand anything. You wanna go to Spain you got a few choices.

Buy a plane ticket and play by the owners rules

Buy a boat ticket and play by the owners rules

Hitch a ride on a ocean liner, or be a deck hand on a rig

OR, buy your own boat/plane and wing it...atleast this way NO ONE can tell you what to do..why, because its YOUR plane/boat.

Again, sorry, as mad as it makes you, and sucks for ALL OF US, we DON'T have the right to demand private companies to do what we say.

Originally posted by Crito
Liberty is most certainly a natural right. Security, on the other hand, isn't.

Don't these kinda go hand in hand? Without one, the other isn't much fun. But again you have liberty...liberty to buy your own plane or go find someone else to fly you who WON'T make you walk through the scanner.

If you don't like freedom move to communist China, and take your virtual strip search machines with you.

I love freedom...especially if I ever own my own business one day...that way I have the freedom to run MY business how I see fit and NOT allow others to trample my RIGHTS and FREEDOM because they want things a certain way to accomadate them. People really are self centered...I mean its not your business to run or rule yet you think you should be able to...wtf..lol

I tell private companies what I think of their product all the time.
Sent an email to Tropicana just the other day complaining about their packaging on a new product that I found confusing and misleading.

Sure, private companies or corporations can choose NOT to listen to customers, but that doesn't mean that customers are supposed to shut up and just keep buying that crap either.

I took a bus to DC not long ago. No security at all. Buses take forever but it's not that bad in the South. Up North it was kinda icky to be on a bus though.
Last time I went I just drove. 14 hours. About 9 extra hours, not bad, I got some audiobooks.

Edited to add: the bus took 27 hours. I had the seat to myself the entire time.

[edit on 3-3-2010 by hadriana]

reply to post by mmiichael

Getting blown up, losing limbs, eyes, 3rd degree burns, lifetime incapacitation. That is what this is trying to prevent

Yeah, but there are other ways to prevent it besides body scanners. Who knows these scanners could have some sort of nefarious use we can't even imagine. The public is something like 30 years behind in technology or something compared to the TPTB. We don't know whattheir true intentions are. If the government would stop helping bombers get onto the planes and stop invading other countries we would not have to worry about it now would we. Or not nearly as much.

Manchester Airport says strict procedures are in place to protect the privacy of passengers, who are randomly selected to go through the scanner.

Randomly?

Is that the PC was of saying "We watch out for hot women and muslims"?

you pay more for less service.
you get what you want.
you is elite.

complaining

written in stone.
scramble a lot of letters here.
it just wont make a tasteful soup.

or could it taste like?

Originally posted by ModernAcademia

As mentioned women should hold these jobs only, but even then it's not good enough

Why? Because women would be above circulating a picture of a very large or small male appendage? Ummm ok. Maybe all the women I know are just aberrant. Ok, they are aberrant, but still, c'mon. Women are not above circulating full body scans of men for a laugh just because they are women.

I think the full body scans are ridiculous, personally, but I do not think having women manning the scanners would ensure any more privacy.

Originally posted by rcwj1975

Originally posted by Crito
Liberty is most certainly a natural right. Security, on the other hand, isn't.

Don't these kinda go hand in hand? Without one, the other isn't much fun. But again you have liberty...liberty to buy your own plane or go find someone else to fly you who WON'T make you walk through the scanner.

If you don't like freedom move to communist China, and take your virtual strip search machines with you.

I love freedom...especially if I ever own my own business one day...that way I have the freedom to run MY business how I see fit and NOT allow others to trample my RIGHTS and FREEDOM because they want things a certain way to accomadate them. People really are self centered...I mean its not your business to run or rule yet you think you should be able to...wtf..lol

You apparently don't know the meaning of the word liberty. You don't have the right to infringe on my liberty so you can feel safe and secure. This is a free society. That means freedom, not security, reigns supreme. When one infringes on the other freedom always trumps security. Sorry if you don't like free societies and wish you lived in a police state where the authorities deem everything to be a government-granted privilege. You're free to leave at any time, however, and the sooner the better for all the rest of us.

[edit on 3-3-2010 by Crito]

Originally posted by rcwj1975
It blows my mind how people think THEY can dictate how others run their own companies. Bottom line is these companies set their own rules and guidlines...they owe you or me NOTHING, and we CHOOSE to use their service..i.e. follow their rules....how is this so hard to get, and better yet what basis is your anger on?

Do I think its over the top, sure, but again the rules aren't mine to make since I don't own the planes or airline. For those of you pissed off...get together and buy a few planes, start an new airline and set your own rules and regs...problem solved....until then, we have no place telling PRIVATE companies how they should operate just because we don't like their way of doing things.

Please name one, just one, private entity that has purchased and/or is using these ridiculous scanners. With but perhaps a tiny few exceptions every single scanner deployment is done via the countries respective gov'ts. Perhaps in socialist Europe where the airlines are substantially owned and operated by their quasi-gov't there is no distinction but speaking just in the USA can you name one airline which has dictated its own policy of requiring their passengers to be body scanned? If this were the case, no problem. The market would prevail.

Your example/solution for those of us who still give a SH*% about privacy is an illogical non sequitur. Do you think that a group of people could "buy a few planes" and then operate in defiance of the FAA? DOT? Or this ridiculous "Homeland Security" monolith? Under which FAA rules would such a carrier be able to operate? Part 121? 135? NOT! And this lunacy will not stop with scheduled carriers either. Already a few of these obtuse "we see terrorists under every rock" idiots are talking about Part 91 private ops as well. So even if we "kooky privacy nuts" had our own Gulfstreams (like so many of these thugs imposing this crap do) we still could not escape the iron fist of the control freaks. And this is about control far more so than some stupid delusions of "security" make no mistake.

Since these scanners are being unleashed on the traveling public by their government(s), it is then up to the public to resist if they find this tyranny intrusive. Ostensibly anyway, that's who they're accountable to.

Finally, I'll offer the following example of your apparent line of thinking; if a significant percentage of motorists in a given state didn't like some asinine traffic law, they should buy their own highway instead of lobbying their state legislatures?

Oh yeah, and what about the people in Denver, Co who are pissed off at the county's use of one of these despicable scanners and the thugs they have operating it? (Told you, airports are just the beginning) I suppose you think if any of the citizens there need to appear in court or pay their taxes, etc., they should all "band together and buy their own court house?"

Your line of thinking is simply antithetical to any freedom or liberty. Remember 'Night of the Long Knives' the next time you start to have another "jack-booted" idea.

[edit on 3/3/2010 by waycoolsnoopy]

[edit on 3/3/2010 by waycoolsnoopy]