Latest News
Gordon Brown is to force the installation of full-body scanners at London Heathrow Airport, despite claims that the machines would not have been able to detect the substance carried by the Christmas Day bomber, who had sewn explosives into his underpants.
Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the man who tried to blow up a transatlantic fight on December 25th 2009, is one of a number of aeroplane bombers who have precipitated an increase in security measures over the past few years.
The United States is now dangerously close to using passenger profiling to catch extremists, a screening process that is particularly harsh on people from Cuba, Iran, Syria and eleven other countries, so selected for their alleged sponsorship of Islamic ‘terror.’
Despite looking a whole lot like selective racism, US officials claim that profiling has become an unavoidable aspect of the modern world. A host of other countries, including Germany, France, Pakistan and Holland, have also upgraded security at major airports.
In the UK, the use of full-body scanners has been cleared by the government, and installation is expected to begin within the next three weeks. Costing £80,000 each, the machines will allow security teams to peek under passenger’s clothes without having to resort to the fabled strip-search.
Critics are terrified – not only are the machines incapable of catching certain kinds of explosive, but the images produced by full-body scanners contravene UK child pornography laws. They are called ‘naked scanners’ for a good reason.
The government is drafting a code of conduct for the scanners, which should stop inappropriate images being leaked out of UK airports, and into the vast gulf of the internet.
Related Links
Manchester Trials ‘Naked Scanner’





Comments - 6
1. John Chubb
21st Jan 2010 - 03:38 PM
I will be interested to hear a reply.
Report Comment
2. Dr L
22nd Jan 2010 - 02:23 AM
1. There is a very low threat to passengers by 'bombers' trying to bring down planes. After all does anyone no of a plane brought down by a passenger carying on a bomb.
2. Secondly even though the level of x-ray is reported to be of 0.1milliseverts any 'safe' levels are a guide based on a distributions of data, that is one can suffer as much damage with low levels or high. Think of it as the risk of cancer when smoking, it may be your first cigaratte or your 1000th that damages your DNA.
3. Dosages are cumulative.
4. This is full body exposure that penetrates into the dermal layer and being at low level absorption and difraction is high in this layer.
5. There have been no long term studies into there effects.
6. Good advice is to avoid or reduce all ionisind radiation and there are no safe levels of exposure.
Bearing this in mind will the airport authorities indemnify against long term health effects.
I think not.
Report Comment
3. Warren
1st Feb 2010 - 02:43 PM
Report Comment
4. beryl tomkins
2nd Feb 2010 - 05:28 PM
Report Comment
5. warey
8th Feb 2010 - 12:52 AM
Report Comment
6. David
5th Mar 2010 - 09:17 AM
Why be concerned if there's nothing to hide.
Report Comment