Muslim women who refused to take 'naked' full-body scan are barred from Flight

[disorderlyvision]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1255104/Muslim-women-barred-flight-refusing-naked-body-scan.html


Two Muslim women have become the first passengers to refuse to subject themselves to controversial 'naked' full body airport scans, it emerged today.
The pair - who security officials insist were selected at random - opted to miss their flight to Pakistan and forfeit tickets worth £400 each rather than be screened.

One of the women refused to go through the full-body scanner at Manchester Airport on religious grounds while her companion also declined for 'medical reasons'.
The women were travelling together to Islamabad when they were selected to pass through the controversial security screen after checking-in at Terminal Two at the airport.
An estimated 15,000 people have already passed through the scanners, with the pair the first passengers to refuse a scan.


Both told airport staff they were not willing to be scanned. They were warned they would not be allowed to board the Pakistan International Airlines flight if they refused.
The pair decided they would rather forfeit their £400 tickets and left the airport with their luggage.

The £80,000 scanners were introduced at Heathrow and Manchester airports on February 5.
The X-ray machines allow security staff to see a 'naked' image of passengers to show up hidden weapons and explosives, but it has attracted criticism for also showing clear outlines of passengers' genitals.

Manchester Airport confirmed the passengers had refused to be scanned but said it had received no complaint from the women


However, civil liberties campaigners say the incident could form the basis of a legal test case to challenge the use of the Rapiscan device in airports.
Alex Deane, director of campaign group Big Brother Watch, said the organisation would represent the women if they wished to challenge the decision in court.


He said: 'People shouldn't have to sacrifice their health, their faith, their dignity, or their privacy in order to fly.
'People with health and religious concerns shouldn't be forced to go through these scanners if they have good reason not to. Foolishly, the government has ignored both issues and ignored privacy concerns to boot - they are in the wrong on this.'

There is one Rapiscan scanner in use in a trial at Manchester Airport's terminal two, which has seen 15,000 people pass through it.

A further two devices - one each for terminals one and three - have been delivered and are set to be operational within the next month.
The scanners have been criticised by the human rights group Liberty and the government's own Equality and Human Rights Commission.
Only selected passengers are scanned. Security staff say they are chosen at random and not according to race, religion or ethnicity.
Councillor Afzal Khan, who was Manchester's first Asian lord mayor, said the vast majority of Muslims believed that any privacy concerns should be outweighed by ensuring they are safe when flying.
He said: 'Hundreds of Muslim passengers have gone through without a problem. While I appreciate people's concerns for privacy, these steps are necessary for our safety and security.'
A Manchester Airport spokesman said: 'Two female passengers who were booked to fly out of Terminal Two refused to be scanned for medical and religious reasons.

'In accordance with the government directive on scanners, they were not permitted to fly.

'Body scanning is a big change for customers and we are aware that privacy concerns are on our customers's minds, which is why we have put strict procedures in place to reassure them that their privacy will be protected.'
Last month, Transport Secretary 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'.

Two weeks ago, a week after the scanners were introduced at Manchester and Heathrow airports, Islamic scholars in the U.S. said Muslim travellers should not pass through the scanners because they violate religious rules on nudity.
The Fiqh Council of North America issued a fatwa, or religious ruling, warning Muslims not to go through the scanners.
‘It is a violation of clear Islamic teachings that men or women be seen naked by other men and women,’ read the order.
‘Islam highly emphasises haya (modesty) and considers it part of faith. The Quran has commanded the believers, both men and women, to cover their private parts.'
In the U.S., there are now 40 scanners in 19 airports and could be as many as 450 by the end of the year.
The powerful council of ten scholars that issued the fatwa is affiliated with the Islamic Society of North America.

[Fozz]

These European bureaucrats are savages.

[NiceGoing]

The airlines would rather go out of business than see anyone with all their clothes on.

:p

[orafi]

the raft and hot air balloon industries are going to sky rocket. investors, keep an eye out

[Danke]

The airlines would rather go out of business than see anyone with all their clothes on.

:p

I don't think this is coming from the airlines. Government.

[NiceGoing]

I don't think this is coming from the airlines. Government.

You are correct. Thanks.

[Brian4Liberty]

Isn't there supposed to be a different procedure for those who don't want to get radiated? A traditional pat-down or something?

[johngr]

I'd like to see Mike Judge dust off Beavis and Butthead and do just one more episode with them as TSA agents. Beavis could drink too much coffee and transform into "Tazeholio" while Butthead laughs at the images on the screen. That'd be cool.

[MelissaWV]

Isn't there supposed to be a different procedure for those who don't want to get radiated? A traditional pat-down or something?

I'm thinking a pat-down wouldn't sit well with a loto of traditional/religious people (especially women and children), either. The idea of having the choice between some pervert in a hidden area viewing your child through their clothes, or a different flunkie touching your child all over and giving them the message that "it's okay; I'm someone in uniform so I have authority to touch you"... it's enough to make sane people not want to fly, thanks.

[RideTheDirt]

I'm thinking a pat-down wouldn't sit well with a loto of traditional/religious people (especially women and children), either. The idea of having the choice between some pervert in a hidden area viewing your child through their clothes, or a different flunkie touching your child all over and giving them the message that "it's okay; I'm someone in uniform so I have authority to touch you"... it's enough to make sane people not want to fly, thanks.
good point

[NiceGoing]

the raft and hot air balloon industries are going to sky rocket. investors, keep an eye out

Maybe, a boon for the bikers.. :)

[MelissaWV]

I'd like to see blimps make a comeback.

:D

Security would still be an issue, but hijackings would be pretty much pointless... they're so slow-moving and could be "towed" off-target in case of an attempt.

I would totally take a vacation by blimp.

[NiceGoing]

We may have a "start-up" here - After all, how did Kentucky Colonel start - small, right ? :p

[andrewh817]

So as soon as its "religious discrimination" then the media gives a damn.....:rolleyes:

[slothman]

These European bureaucrats are savages.

It's not all of Erupoe(sic).
It's only the UK.

I do have an easy remedy to avoid these.
Don't go to England.
With all the Ohrellian(sp) stuff already there I decided to not go before this.

I'll miss all the good sights but I'll still have my privacy, et al.

Oh well, no Magic Rotary for me. :(

[Brian4Liberty]

I'm thinking a pat-down wouldn't sit well with a loto of traditional/religious people (especially women and children), either. The idea of having the choice between some pervert in a hidden area viewing your child through their clothes, or a different flunkie touching your child all over and giving them the message that "it's okay; I'm someone in uniform so I have authority to touch you"... it's enough to make sane people not want to fly, thanks.

Yeah, neither option is preferred. I thought I had heard that pat-down has always been the "extra check" option, and that those who don't want to be put through the scanner can still go the "traditional" route. This whole "nude" scanner thing is such a scam. It doesn't provide any additional security, and it's full of pork-style corruption. Isn't Chertoff making money on this? Not to mention radiation...

I would refuse to go through their scanner, but offer to strip and walk around if they want. :eek:

[MelissaWV]

Yeah, neither option is preferred. I thought I had heard that pat-down has always been the "extra check" option, and that those who don't want to be put through the scanner can still go the "traditional" route. This whole "nude" scanner thing is such a scam. It doesn't provide any additional security, and it's full of pork-style corruption. Isn't Chertoff making money on this? Not to mention radiation...

I would refuse to go through their scanner, but offer to strip and walk around if they want. :eek:

It would serve them right if some woman went all feminist crazy psychobitch on them. "That scanner can see through my clothes. You seeing me naked against my will is rape. If you want me to go anywhere other than where I'm standing right now, then I'm going to fight you like you're a rapist."

Then screech "RAPE! RRRRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPE!" as she kicks anyone who comes close enough in the balls.

Yeah, well, she'd get tazed... but still... it'd serve folks right.

[Brian4Liberty]

It would serve them right if some woman went all feminist crazy psychobitch on them. "That scanner can see through my clothes. You seeing me naked against my will is rape. If you want me to go anywhere other than where I'm standing right now, then I'm going to fight you like you're a rapist."

Then screech "RAPE! RRRRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPE!" as she kicks anyone who comes close enough in the balls.

Yeah, well, she'd get tazed... but still... it'd serve folks right.

My protest is to give them an extra dose of their own medicine: take off your clothes, kind of like those protesters in Europe did. You should have seen how fast they didn't want me to strip when I started taking my pants off at the airport... ;)

[MelissaWV]

My protest is to give them an extra dose of their own medicine: take off your clothes, kind of like those protesters in Europe did. You should have seen how fast they didn't want me to strip when I started taking my pants off at the airport... ;)

Somehow I don't think that "protest" would have the right effect if I undertook it.

Plus I don't show skin "just like that" for anyone; that's my personal objection to the scanners. The fact the Government's imposing this makes it a billion times more sour, but ultimately if this were a private airline imposing this as security to board their planes, I wouldn't fly that airline, either.

So stripping off my clothes and giving everyone there (and probably on the internet, since that's the world we live in now) a free show wouldn't be a good idea to me :D

[LibForestPaul]

Reasonable cavity checks to keep us god-fearing Americans reasonable safe!

Damn Muzzie lovers!

[JustinTime]

It would serve them right if some woman went all feminist crazy psychobitch on them. "That scanner can see through my clothes. You seeing me naked against my will is rape. If you want me to go anywhere other than where I'm standing right now, then I'm going to fight you like you're a rapist."

Then screech "RAPE! RRRRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPE!" as she kicks anyone who comes close enough in the balls.

Yeah, well, she'd get tazed... but still... it'd serve folks right.


So as soon as its "religious discrimination" then the media gives a damn.....:rolleyes:

Sadly, the only way people rise up and put a stop to abuses anymore is if you can make it some sort of discrimination. Oh well, whatever works.

[slothman]

If some private person, such as a charter, flies then does it have to deal with the TSA?
If not then it seems an easy way to start a place company.

[BlackTerrel]

The airlines would rather go out of business than see anyone with all their clothes on.

From the article:

An estimated 15,000 people have already passed through the scanners, with the pair the first passengers to refuse a scan.

2 out of 15,000 refuse. I think they'll take that.

[BlackTerrel]

Two Muslim women have become the first passengers to refuse to subject themselves to controversial 'naked' full body airport scans, it emerged today.
The pair - who security officials insist were selected at random - opted to miss their flight to Pakistan and forfeit tickets worth £400 each rather than be screened.

BTW does anyone else notice how completely idiotic our security system is? This is how it works:

1. They at random select a couple passengers to go through these scanners.

2. The passengers can either go through the scanner, or refuse and lose their tickets.

Now can any reasonable person not see how this will fail? It will not stop a single terrorist. No one who is actually strapping a bomb to themselves will go through the scanner. If you're a terrorist who is randomly selected and you have a bomb attached you will refuse and come back a couple days later and try again.

The only way this works is having every single person go through. How do these people not understand this?

[Liberty Stud]

If Muslims refuse the body scan, then what is the point of the whole damn thing????

Fail.

[Brad Zink]

If Muslims refuse the body scan, then what is the point of the whole damn thing????


It's not for "Muslims." Religions are simply Mind Control Operations which are used to play groups off against each other.

The point of the scan is to get a naked image of every person, which can be put into a database linked to an artificial intelligence network. Futhermore, the scans rip apart the DNA (http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/arxiv/24331/) of every person who walks through the machine, causing an alteration in gene expression and DNA replication. (Killing people when they're young is one way to avoid paying them Social Security when the system is running a deficit).

In addition to that, these disruptions to DNA can last for multiple generations, damaging the health of generations unborn. See: Epigenetics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epigenetics).

[NiceGoing]

From the article:

An estimated 15,000 people have already passed through the scanners, with the pair the first passengers to refuse a scan.

2 out of 15,000 refuse. I think they'll take that.

Wow, that is quite a surprise to me.

I would've thought they would be losing customers on a daily basis. Maybe they are lying about this, though, so as to discourage as many as they can from "opting out."

[specialK]

Wow, that is quite a surprise to me.

I would've thought they would be losing customers on a daily basis. "

I'm certain they are losing customers on a daily basis. Many people such as myself, now refuse to fly to, through or from any destination that uses naked body scanners. Screw them.

[jbuttell]

It definitely made me think twice about taking a trip to London a few weeks ago. Not that I really care about someone seeing me naked for the sake of being naked, only that they shouldn't have that authority to demand it of me... and more importantly I'm not yet convinced that the process is completely harmless to the body.

[BlackTerrel]

It's not for "Muslims." Religions are simply Mind Control Operations which are used to play groups off against each other.

Good point.


The point of the scan is to get a naked image of every person, which can be put into a database linked to an artificial intelligence network. Futhermore, the scans rip apart the DNA (http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/arxiv/24331/) of every person who walks through the machine, causing an alteration in gene expression and DNA replication. (Killing people when they're young is one way to avoid paying them Social Security when the system is running a deficit).

This is true. However the negative effects can be minimized by wearing tin foil body armor.

[BlackTerrel]

Wow, that is quite a surprise to me.

I would've thought they would be losing customers on a daily basis. Maybe they are lying about this, though, so as to discourage as many as they can from "opting out."

I think you're underestimating how huge a pain it is to miss your flight.

"Sorry mom can't make it home for Christmas"

"Sorry boss, can't make the meeting I refused to go through a body scanner"

Don't see those going over too well.

[lester1/2jr]

EVERYONE should do this

[NiceGoing]

I'm certain they are losing customers on a daily basis. Many people such as myself, now refuse to fly to, through or from any destination that uses naked body scanners. Screw them.

That's what I would have thought, and am very glad to hear it!!

:)

[NiceGoing]

I think you're underestimating how huge a pain it is to miss your flight.

"Sorry mom can't make it home for Christmas"

"Sorry boss, can't make the meeting I refused to go through a body scanner"

Don't see those going over too well.

It's a choice, but as Jefferson said, liberty requires sacrifice. I think this naked scanning is a total humiliation and embarrassment for all *who accept it.* The DEMANDS have to be stopped somewhere, why not proudly right here?

[ChaosControl]

Good for them, everyone should refuse. Anyone who doesn't refuse is submitting to the 1984 authoritarian big brother b.s.

[DAFTEK]

I wonder out of those 15k people how many let their children go threw???

I know i would not let them body scan my kids, fuck them!!! I'll raise hell and call the American embassy and news media if i lost my ticket and make sure they understand that.

[lester1/2jr]

If I had a newspaper I'd print this right next to the story of the TSA worker molesting the 12 year old.

[specialK]

If I had a newspaper I'd print this right next to the story of the TSA worker molesting the 12 year old.

What about the legal molestation that goes on daily?

My sister's 18 month old baby, en route to Hawaii, was patted down while he screamed. Even an infant has the visceral response to know that this is just wrong.

[KCIndy]

I'd like to see blimps make a comeback.

:D

Security would still be an issue, but hijackings would be pretty much pointless... they're so slow-moving and could be "towed" off-target in case of an attempt.

I would totally take a vacation by blimp.


Hey, I *LIKE* that!

You're right - hijackings would be pointless.

Blimps - or better, dirigibles (rigid framed, ala the WWI Zepplins) could still travel fast enough to make air travel an attractive and competitive option, but there's no way they could be crashed into buildings. For that matter, as long as they weren't filled with hydrogen, there's not much chance a hijacker could even sabotage the thing effectively enough to make it crash.

And we could put Ron Paul banners on the sides!!

Ron Paul Blimpways, anyone??? :D

[Liberty Star]

I'm surprised that this is the first case, very compliant and obedient public has been groomed it seems.



Reasonable cavity checks to keep us god-fearing Americans reasonable safe!



Yep, even more reasonable underwear measures could be coming as the photo shows:

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpost.php?p=2521882&postcount=7