Karl`s PC Help Forums

Body scanners in airports a "scam"
marymary100 - 3-1-2010 at 10:48

Quote:


Since (Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab's) attack was foiled, body-scanners, using "millimetre-wave" technology and revealing a naked image of a passenger, have been touted as a solution to the problem of detecting explosive devices that are not picked up by traditional metal detectors such as those containing liquids, chemicals or plastic explosive.

But Ben Wallace, the Conservative MP, who was formerly involved in a project by a leading British defence research firm to develop the scanners for airport use, said trials had shown that such low-density materials went undetected.


Are body scanners being touted as a solution so that passengers feel safer (without cause) and continue to fly? Is it more about money than safety?

Full article


John_Little - 3-1-2010 at 11:05

Probably.


dr john - 3-1-2010 at 12:13

If it detects some problems / suspicious items, it is better than nothing.

And they don't even claim they can detect every item - if they did claim this, that would be fake protection.

But I think you'll find that the airports treat this seriously and spending large sums of money of a device that did nothing, to reduce fear but still damage their reputation if something got through would not be a course of action that they took.

Also.
Suppose someone did successfully smuggle a bomb on board via a terminal that didn't use such a scanner and the scanner was perfectly capable of detecting the object. What would you think of that terminal?


giron - 3-1-2010 at 12:41

It should be made compulsory that all air passengers travel in the nude, thus making it more difficult for them to conceal weapons and explosives. waggyfinger

No doubt Obama will be issuing a statement, shortly.

After he's told the world about the aliens, of course.


Quaver - 3-1-2010 at 13:02

Quote:
Originally posted by giron
I should be made compulsory that all air passengers travel in the nude, thus making it more difficult for them to conceal weapons and explosives. waggyfinger

:D:D:D


waffler - 3-1-2010 at 16:38

Quote:
Originally posted by giron
It should be made compulsory that all air passengers travel in the nude, thus making it more difficult for them to conceal weapons and explosives. waggyfinger

No doubt Obama will be issuing a statement, shortly.

After he's told the world about the aliens, of course.


Don't mention Obama it wll send Scholar off on one his rants :D


marymary100 - 3-1-2010 at 19:23

and we'll need to move the thread...


giron - 3-1-2010 at 19:25

It wouldn't be the first time you've had to do that! :D


marymary100 - 3-1-2010 at 19:26

It would be nice if it didn't need to be done this decade.


giron - 3-1-2010 at 19:29

What are the chances of that happening? :D


waffler - 3-1-2010 at 22:33

Very Slim to None :)


scholar - 4-1-2010 at 00:14

Quote:
Originally posted by marymary100
It would be nice if it didn't need to be done this decade.
We are still in the first decade of the 21st century.

The year 2000 was the final year of the final decade of the 20th century.


waffler - 4-1-2010 at 00:16

I was reading something today and it said this is the start of a new decade :)


giron - 4-1-2010 at 00:23

Yes, that's correct, a new decade always starts at zero.


scholar - 4-1-2010 at 00:33

If you owe someone a "decade" of dollars, will he be happy if you count out his payment:

0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9 Okay, that's it, with the ninth dollar, you have all that's owed you.

Or, does zero not count as numbering the first dollar of your payment, so that you have to pay
1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10

The twentieth century, including the last decade of the twentieth century, was not over until the year 2000 was completed. The year 2000 was part of the 20th century (indeed, that is where the century gets its name), not the 21st century.

It is the same with decades.


scholar - 4-1-2010 at 00:44

Umar's attempt at terrorism was pretty much a failure.

Then, as a direct result of his effort, $160 million was spent on scanners.

So, his attempt caused $160 million in damage to the economy, just in the cost for the scanners. Those who made the decision snatched defeat from the jaws of victory. Umar did not succeed in causing the harm he wished--then, government officials handed $160,000,000 worth of financial harm to him as a gift with a bow on top.

The US doesn't need terrorists to harm us. Our government does it for them.


waffler - 4-1-2010 at 00:44

Wiki Decade

Perhaps this may help :)


giron - 4-1-2010 at 00:45

Quote:
Originally posted by scholar


It is the same with decades.


Absolute rubbish! waggyfinger

Time begins at 0, thus the end of a decade is 23:59:59:59:59:59: recurring, on the year 9.


giron - 4-1-2010 at 00:51

Quote:
Originally posted by scholar


The US doesn't need terrorists to harm us. Our government does it for them.


Thread moved to the USA Politics and healthcare Forum it is then. shocked_yellow


marymary100 - 4-1-2010 at 00:54

Guess so...


scholar - 4-1-2010 at 00:57

Wiki, to decide a disagreement?rolls_eyes

This is the same wiki that reported Rush Limbaugh died in Hawaii last week, right? :D:D:Drolls_eyes :P:P:P

The link you presented, O Waffler gives lots of examples of people speaking of a decade as if the years ending in zero went with the next 9 years. But the question is not whether people ever speak or write this way. The question is, when they do so, are they speaking accurately or making an error?

Dr. Walter E. Williams took some time in a radio show he hosted to explain that the usage, though common, is in error.:)


Daz - 4-1-2010 at 00:57

Quote:
Originally posted by scholar
Umar's attempt at terrorism was pretty much a failure.

Then, as a direct result of his effort, $160 million was spent on scanners.

So, his attempt caused $160 million in damage to the economy, just in the cost for the scanners. Those who made the decision snatched defeat from the jaws of victory. Umar did not succeed in causing the harm he wished--then, government officials handed $160,000,000 worth of financial harm to him as a gift with a bow on top.

The US doesn't need terrorists to harm us. Our government does it for them.


So, you would rather your Govt' spend no money on protective measures, thus enabling a slightly more adept suicide bomber to succeed in his/her attempt at blowing up a plane the next time...

Seems rather short sighted, to me anyway...?

I'd rather the penny pinching was carried out elsewhere, and not in scenarios where peoples lives were unnecessarily put in greater risk.


giron - 4-1-2010 at 01:04

Quote:
Originally posted by Daz

I'd rather the penny pinching was carried out elsewhere, and not in scenarios where peoples lives were unnecessarily put in greater risk.


No need for penny pinching if people paid their taxes! waggyfinger


Daz - 4-1-2010 at 01:07

Quote:
Originally posted by giron
Quote:
Originally posted by Daz

I'd rather the penny pinching was carried out elsewhere, and not in scenarios where peoples lives were unnecessarily put in greater risk.


No need for penny pinching if people paid their taxes! waggyfinger


Until you provide proof of non tax payments, I can comment no further... ;)


giron - 4-1-2010 at 01:09

It's not me that's in trouble with the IRS for tax evasion! waggyfinger


Daz - 4-1-2010 at 01:11

Quote:
Originally posted by giron
It's not me that's in trouble with the IRS for tax evasion! waggyfinger


Am I supposed to take your word for it? ;)


giron - 4-1-2010 at 01:15

If you don't believe me, just ask Obama, he'll tell you! ;)


scholar - 4-1-2010 at 01:16

Quote:
Originally posted by Daz
So, you would rather your Govt' spend no money on protective measures, thus enabling a slightly more adept suicide bomber to succeed in his/her attempt at blowing up a plane the next time...

Seems rather short sighted, to me anyway...?

I'd rather the penny pinching was carried out elsewhere, and not in scenarios where peoples lives were unnecessarily put in greater risk.
The article indicates that the scanners are ineffective against the kind of bomb Umar used, because the scanning rays go right through it--it is transparent to them, the same as the clothing is.

So, the accurate question is, would I prefer that the government spend $160 million for an ineffective approach, or would I prefer they not do so? This is the classic, "We in the government have to DO SOMETHING! -- even if we do something that won't solve the problem."

I prefer the Israeli approach--train your security people to figure out who the terrorists are, and concentrate on them. This will be a nightmare for some innocent people whose business takes them to Yemen, Pakistan, Afghanistan, or who innocently sell office equipment to and have phone conversations with known terrorists--they will learn to hate airports. But, when was the last time an Israeli airline jet was hijacked or blown up?


Daz - 4-1-2010 at 01:16

Damn, my hotline has been deactivated...

I neglected to pay the bill it seems...! :D


Katzy - 4-1-2010 at 21:16

Actually, Scholar's right.

There was, don't forget, no year "0".

So, the first decade A.D. ended on Dec. 31st. 0010, NOT 0009.


scholar - 4-1-2010 at 21:38

Quote:
Originally posted by Katzy
Actually, Scholar's right.

There was, don't forget, no year "0".

So, the first decade A.D. ended on Dec. 31st. 0010, NOT 0009.
doffs_cap


giron - 4-1-2010 at 22:09

So, 1970 was part of the 60's decade, I'm glad you've cleared that up. confused2


marymary100 - 4-1-2010 at 22:49

Quite.


Anyway - back on topic - as countries fall over themselves to buy airport scanners liquid explosives still won't show up, nor will explosives carried within the body. Apparently someone carried in explosives in their rectum to try and kill one Saudi leader.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/yemen/6924502/Detroit-terror-attack-Britain-sends-counter-terrorist-forces- to-Yemen.html


The UK Borders Agency is looking to the government for definitive guidance/a change in the law on profiling. Until then ex-GPO workers are just as likely to be scanned as Musthav Abomb.


scholar - 4-1-2010 at 23:25

I have been hearing on the radio news that, after the Americans announced that new security measures are in place starting today, the Euopean airports are refusing to cooperate.


waffler - 5-1-2010 at 02:13

Quote:
Originally posted by Katzy
Actually, Scholar's right.

There was, don't forget, no year "0".

So, the first decade A.D. ended on Dec. 31st. 0010, NOT 0009.


But they were on a different calendar than us :)


waffler - 5-1-2010 at 02:24

Decade


Quaver - 5-1-2010 at 03:32

Quote:
Originally posted by waffler
Decade

OK, new decade it iskewl_glasses


waffler - 5-1-2010 at 03:45

Try tellin Scholar :D


waffler - 5-1-2010 at 03:48

There are many arguments on the net as to wether it is or isn't , and I cannot find anything official , but most posts I find seem to point to it being a new decade :)


Quaver - 5-1-2010 at 04:52

Quote:
Originally posted by waffler
There are many arguments on the net as to wether it is or isn't , and I cannot find anything official , but most posts I find seem to point to it being a new decade :)

If it's good enough for you, then it's good enough for me:Dwaveysmiley


marymary100 - 5-1-2010 at 08:35

I'd rather argue about something more important to be honest. It is a new decade - believe it or not.

I read about a Nigerian spokesperson who said something along the lines of:

* 1 Nigerian out of 150 million
* educated outside of Nigeria
* radicalised outside of Nigeria
* reported to the authorities by a Nigerian

is being used as an excuse to discriminate against millions of Nigerians who fly every year.

Quite a good point I thought.


giron - 5-1-2010 at 17:56

I didn't realise that millions of Nigerians were being discriminated against, was it in the news? confused2


marymary100 - 5-1-2010 at 18:18

One version of the complaint.


giron - 5-1-2010 at 18:27

From the link -




Quote:

Nigerians are among 14 nations whose nationals face stiffer rules including body searches and luggage checks.

Four other African countries - Algeria, Libya, Somalia and Sudan - are also subject to the new measures.


So it's not just Nigerians that are being singled out.

As far as I'm concerned, America is entitled to take any measures it likes, in order to attempt to detect terrorists.

If these people don't like it, tough, they should stay out of America!


marymary100 - 5-1-2010 at 19:42

The complaint is that they are being unfairly judged based on the actions of one man as they are not a State that sponsors terrorism as the others are reputed to do.

I don't disagree that America should take reasonable measures to protect people on their own soil. The scanners, by all accounts, are not going to improve security however.

I'd be quite interested to know who is going to benefit financially from these scanners being compulsorily installed in so many airports.


giron - 5-1-2010 at 21:18

Quote:
Originally posted by marymary100
The scanners, by all accounts, are not going to improve security however.

I'd be quite interested to know who is going to benefit financially from these scanners being compulsorily installed in so many airports.


Presumably the ones that will benefit financially are the people that supply and install the scanners.

As you say, it appears that the scanners aren't all they're claimed to be, so it could be a rather expensive PR exercise in order to divert attention from the failings of the current security operations.


marymary100 - 5-1-2010 at 21:32

Yes, but who are they?

For example one of the Republicans who frequently spoke about loving his mother when trying to convince others to support a healthcare amendment a few years ago left government almost immediately after its successful adoption for a salary of $2,000,000 with the compaany who had most to gain from the amendment.

I'm just wondering if there is a similar agenda this time around.


giron - 5-1-2010 at 21:42

I don't know, but I know a man that might.

Over to you, scholar, who's making money from these machines?


marymary100 - 5-1-2010 at 22:07

Two American companies funnily enough:

Quote:
Rapiscan Systems in Ocean Springs, Miss., and L-3 Communications Holdings, based in New York, have met TSA's "imaging technology standards" for scanners in airports.


Not sure if they are the only ones as it was an American article I was reading.

Edit - Rapsican do have UK links

L-3 are connected with Lockheed and have also been sued for detainee abuse by an Abu Ghraib prisoner.


giron - 5-1-2010 at 22:15

There's not necessarily anything sinister with that, a large proportion of high tech equipment is manufactured in America.

However, there are still important questions to be answered concerning it's effectiveness and whether it was a wise use of taxpayers money to purchase it.


scholar - 5-1-2010 at 23:08

Quote:
Originally posted by marymary100
Yes, but who are they?

For example one of the Republicans who frequently spoke about loving his mother when trying to convince others to support a healthcare amendment a few years ago left government almost immediately after its successful adoption for a salary of $2,000,000 with the compaany who had most to gain from the amendment.

I'm just wondering if there is a similar agenda this time around.
Former Senator Tom Daschle (Democrat) made a large sum of money as a lobbyist for health care interests, and then Obama asked him to be Secretary of Health and Welfare. But, the nomination was withdrawn because, while a lobbyist, Daschle was so greedy and crooked that he did not report all his lawful income. Two other tax cheats had already been approved to serve in Obama's cabinet, and yet another seemed just too much--especially after Obama had campaigned against the influence of lobbyists in Washington, vowing that they would have no role in his government. Actually, he hired them as readily as anybody else.

While Daschle did not get the official post, Obama has thanked him for his role in futhering Government Tyranny Health Care. Of course, Obama and the legislators have written into the bill that they do not have to live under the health care that it provides, they get their elite, priviledged care.


giron - 5-1-2010 at 23:13

That's all very well, but what's it got to do with airport security? confused2


waffler - 6-1-2010 at 00:44

Quote:

Obama


The obama word has crept in again :D


giron - 6-1-2010 at 00:49

It's bound to, isn't it?

He's to blame for everything that happens in the world, including us being invaded by aliens! waggyfinger


LSemmens - 6-1-2010 at 14:19

Don't forget, giron, he's also to blame for a USA Politics and Healthcare forum, too.


giron - 6-1-2010 at 14:51

I'll think you'll find it was scholar that was responsible for that. waggyfinger


dr john - 6-1-2010 at 15:05

Quote:
Originally posted by scholar
If you owe someone a "decade" of dollars, will he be happy if you count out his payment:

0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9 Okay, that's it, with the ninth dollar, you have all that's owed you.

Or, does zero not count as numbering the first dollar of your payment, so that you have to pay
1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10

The twentieth century, including the last decade of the twentieth century, was not over until the year 2000 was completed. The year 2000 was part of the 20th century (indeed, that is where the century gets its name), not the 21st century.

It is the same with decades.


Ah, we strongly agree yet again.
And of course there is no year Zero in the calendar, as we had 1BC and then 1AD, so the last year of the first decade was 10AD.


giron - 6-1-2010 at 20:50

As Arthur C. Clarke, allegedly, once said - " If the scale on your grocer's weighing machine began at 1 instead of 0, would you be happy when he claimed he'd sold you 10 kg of tea?"


Quaver - 7-1-2010 at 03:13

But if one says I'm in my fifties, and that person was exactly 60 years old, doesn't that sound kind of strangeconfused2


scholar - 7-1-2010 at 04:33

Quote:
Originally posted by Quaver
But if one says I'm in my fifties, and that person was exactly 60 years old, doesn't that sound kind of strangeconfused2
It would be accurate to say, "I'm in my sixth decade" from age 51-60.

Little When will be able to say, "I'm in my first decade" when she is three years old, or four, or any age through ten.


marymary100 - 7-1-2010 at 07:06

Body scanners - anyone, anyone?


Quaver - 7-1-2010 at 07:14

Quote:
Originally posted by marymary100
Body scanners - anyone, anyone?

Oh yes, side tracked there again:D
Didn't some UK airports already have some? They were probably waiting for something like this to get the go ahead they needed;)

Edit: Here it is http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article504009.ece


LSemmens - 7-1-2010 at 11:48

Quote:
Originally posted by marymary100
Body scanners - anyone, anyone?


It's a Communist Plot, I tell you! teacher_mode


giron - 7-1-2010 at 23:53

I'll tell you what, it's about time Sir Clive Sinclair designed an air port scanner based on ZX81 technology, not only would it detect all these jonnie foreigner chappies with explosive devices concealed in their underpants, it would only cost 50 quid to produce. waggyfinger


LSemmens - 8-1-2010 at 13:15

You may be on a good point there, giron!