Correction: Manchester airport substituting one naked scanner for another

The headlines for all of the articles this past week about the backscatter naked scanners trial ending at England's Manchester airport are so misleading. For example, "Manchester Airport's body scanners scrapped" and "Manchester airport axes controversial 'naked' scanners after EU fails to approve them."

Here's what has really happened. The EU approved backscatter naked scanners on a trial basis. The trial automatically expires in October, and Manchester was the airport where these scanners were installed. Therefore, the scanners will be illegal in the EU starting next month and Manchester has to stop using them.

But, the EU has no such law against the millimeter wave scanners. So Manchester will be swapping one naked scanner - the MMW version with the software upgrade showing cartoon figures - for the old naked scanner - the x-ray backscatter version. As I've written here before, the MMW scanners with the cartoon software are still taking an image of unclothed people, virtually strip-searching them. But, instead of showing the security goons that data in a format that looks like an actual naked person, it shows the data in the form of a cartoon. Either way, the data exists to reconstruct an unclothed person - the software is just hiding it.

False alarm rate is alarming Europeans

Millimeter scanners are not only a gross violation of privacy, they are also ineffective. Of choose we knew this anecdotally from the number of people who report getting the scan-n-grope. But now the European states are coming forward with their own numbers, and the false alarm rate is about 50%.

Mexico vs US

A Stop TSA Scanners subscriber wrote the following about a recent trip to Mexico:

Thought I'd share the experience I had on last weeks flt from Mexico.  We went thru metal detector with shoes on, carryon bags xrayed but not rifled thru. Their security agents were polite & curteous asking"how did you like Mexico?".  This is the way the US should be AND if it is this uncomplicated to fly INTO the US why does tsa make it so difficult to fly WITHIN the US?

It's BS!

 The sheep are easier to handle when they are compliant. Keep fighting infringement on your rights and dignity - protect yourself and inform yourself!

Naked scanners throughout the empire

There are body scanners, and TSA agents, in Guam. It's easy to forget that the US is an empire, and not very benevolent at that, so this is just a little reminder.

EU Bans X-Ray Scanners

At least the EU is coming to its senses. Neither the millimeter wave (MMW) nor the backscatter x-ray devices have been independently tested and privacy concerns abound. The MMW scanners produce the same image but TSA has added a software overlay to hide the image shown to the public. The scanners had privacy software and were using it in Europe in 2009 but TSA spent an additional $42 million to install existing software that they could have been supplied originally at no cost. The privacy software is only available on the MMW ProVision units not on the more revealing Rapi-Scan x-ray units The Rapi-Scan units will continue to produce the naked image and potentially pose a cancer risk, particularly if malfunctioning and left in service.

The nude images will still be in the system and will remain susceptible to storage and reproduction. The EPIC lawsuit revealed that TSA had stored over two thousand these images and TSA admitted that was true but insisted that these were “volunteers”. Likely the passengers who used the scanners voluntarily during the testing phase in 2008 and 2009. Consequently there are thousands of passenger scan images stored in computers TSA without their consent.

When the scanners went into service in November TSA said the images were cartoonish and could be on the cover of Readers Digest. In August Denver TSA area director Pat Ahlstrom, said the scans " were graphic, no doubt about it," So the TSA story about these being "chalk outlines" was apparently an outright lie intended to pacify travelers and disguise the fact they were being digitally strip searched.

Ready for the job

A Ghanaian politician who lost the last presidential election in a run-off recently offended airport security workers when he refused to be humiliated and invaded by their security procedures. Sounds like he's ready for office! When's the last time Obama or W submitted to the TSA's scan-n-grope?

Letter to the editor criticizes media coverage of scanners

How refreshing. A Florida newspaper ran another glowing report (I'm sure a verbatim TSA press release with local commentary thrown in) about the local airport getting new scanners (with the cartoon software upgrade pre-installed - hence the propaganda). Not so fast, says a reader and frequent flier, what about the customer's point of view?

My wife and I had to use this machine when leaving Daytona Beach on Oct. 20. The machine found two problems; one on me and one on my wife.

...I just felt if The News-Journal was presenting all of the wonderful quotes by officials, it should also present the view of customers using the new TSA scanners.

Read the short letter to the editor for details on the "threats" these machines detected. Today, another reader followed up, pointing out that TSA rules are just plain dumb:

...The TSA's policy about carrying on a water bottle is another example of government policy gone overboard. I was going through security at Amsterdam's Schipol airport, and had forgotten about a water bottle in my carry-on. When the machine caught it, I was preparing to throw it in the trash can. The security officer motioned for me to take a drink from the bottle. I took a drink, swallowed the water and he then indicated it was OK to keep the water. If the security at Schipol can do this, why can't we?

The answer to his question is two-fold: All government-run programs, including airport "security," has a natural tendency to be idiotic, wasteful, and cruel because the incentives are for bureaucrats to protect their own butts (which is often at odds with protecting yours!). Second, the US is running an empire, so our bureaucracies are even dumber, more wasteful, and more cruel than your run-of-the-mill country's (like The Netherlands').

Time to move to New Zealand

My cousin married a Kiwi and she is a nice woman, I've heard it's beautiful, and they treat airline passengers like, well, paying customers with someplace to go.

Scanners in Europe

The EU has approved the use of scanners, with more stipulations than the US considered. After some testing, German police claim there is too high a false positive rate for scanners they've been testing. Apparently, European leaders have slightly more sense than the TSA and Congress. But only slightly.

Millimeter-wave scanners coming to Sydney

This isn't the most clearly-written article, but it appears that a trial just started with a cartoon-image scanner at Sydney airport in Australia. Furthermore:

The trial is voluntary, however [federal transport minister] Albanese said post trial it would “absolutely” become compulsory because aviation security was “not optional”.

No scanners in Dubai

Some countries still have some sense:

Airports in Dubai also refused full-body scanners as part of their border security regime because the devices do not correspond with national customs and ethics.

Brig Ahmed bin Thani, the Dubai Police’s director of airport security: ‘I do not feel that it is necessary for us to implement such a technology while we are operating different methods and have different avenues that have worked so far.

‘The use of such a device violates personal privacy and it raises a very sensitive issue for passengers, in addition to the fact that it does not complement our national ethics.’

The comment period on scanners in the UK

The ruling of the EPIC v DHS case was that the TSA should have, and now must, have a notice and comment period on the scanners.

However, the judges ruled that the TSA should have conducted a "notice-and-comment rulemaking" procedure before implementing their decision and remanded the matter to the TSA for further proceedings. Marc Rotenberg, the EPIC Executive Director, responded to the ruling by saying that "many Americans object to the airport body scanner program. Now they will have an opportunity to express their views to the TSA and the agency must take their views into account as a matter of law".

In the UK, their airline security organization (the Department for Transport) did conduct such a comment period. Here's how it went:

Last week's ruling serves as a reminder that the AIT system is also in use across UK airports. In January 2010, the government announced a package of measures to enhance the protection of the travelling public following the failed Christmas Day plot, including the introduction of AIT full body scanners.

An interim code of practice was published by the Department for Transport to support the introduction of AIT scanners at Heathrow and Manchester airports and a consultation on the code was commenced on 29 March 2010. The purpose of the consultation was to seek the public's views on the interim code with a view to preparing the final code of practice.
Responses were made to the consultation by, amongst others, Liberty, the Equality and Human Rights Commission and the Islamic Human Rights Commission. Each organisation was concerned at the impact the implementation of the AIT scanners would have on a traveller's privacy. Unlike in the United States, if an individual is selected for body scanning in the UK, an alternative will not be offered.

This was emphasised in Liberty's response which said that

"the issue here is not a refusal to submit to a security search, but the disproportionate impact on some people's privacy…caused by the lack of an alternative means of being searched. While some may object to revealing these intimate details and may prefer this to be being physically touched, human rights concerns the dignity of individuals and, a majority-rules approach is not only inappropriate, it may also be unlawful."

The consultation on body-scanners in UK airports closed on 19 July 2010. Clear questions have been raised in response but no final code yet produced.

The UK installed the scanners. No alternatives were made available. Basically, comments were made, but no attempt was made to address them. But the author of this article is hopeful:

Perhaps the recent judgment in the US court of appeals will revive the issue on this side of the pond.

 I am not. I fully expect the TSA to continue to ignore our concerns.

Traveling by air in UK and Canada

Here's a couple of articles of interest regarding international airport security:

• The UK will be changing things up, but, while details are scarce, there is some speculation that they will adopt something more similar to the wonderful American TSA model:

Philip Hammond, the UK transport minister, is encouraging airports to rely on better screening devices rather than notionally random checks, which all too often end up with a certain percentage of passengers just being pulled aside for no specific reason.

The UK is also planning better links between airports and immigration officers of the UK Border Agency, which is aimed at reducing the bottlenecks at immigration that any regular Heathrow traveller will have experienced.

Aviation minister Theresa Villiers told the UK's Daily Telegraph: "What we are looking for is a better security outcome and we want this done in a more passenger-friendly way." 

It's clear that any changes will be underpinned by new technology -- potentially including the unpopular full-body millimetre-wave scanners currently employed at some US airports by the Transportation Safety Administration (TSA). 

The "passenger-friendly" suggested by Ms Villiers could involve the model suggested by airline trade body IATA at its Singapore meeting last month, which Australian Business Traveller walked through.

• Canada is also following the TSA's lead in testing the cartoon software upgrade to their scanners. The article also gives some information about current airport systems in Canada:

[TSA-like Bureaucrat] Larocque said while in the U.S. the scanners are used as primary screening devices, the 41 located in Canadian airports are a secondary process if something is detected during the initial scan or a passenger is randomly selected. A passenger also has the choice of the scan or a physical search, Larocque added. 

Canada only uses the millimetre wave scanners.

Is the Israeli model so great?

Conservatives who don't like the TSA's current policy, but are still hopelessly bound up in the idea that we need airport security and, furthermore, the answer is profiling, often point to Israel as a model. Here's a sympathizer to the security state's take on traveling in Israel:

All told, it took me more than 90 minutes to get to my gate, although a good portion of that can be attributed to the ticket counter.

This process works well, mainly because Israelis are looking for actual security problems and not simply sampling for problems.  But the application in the US would be controversial on several points.  First, as noted, Israelis have no qualms about profiling as part of this process.  But perhaps more of an issue is the time and effort needed in this process. ...

Nevermind that all of this is still unconstitutional. We are innocent until proven guilty in this country. Detainments must be based on reasonable suspicion. Searches require written warrants signed by a judge detailing the person, time, place, crime, etc... We shouldn't want to turn our country into a police state. And, by the way, the terrorists don't hate us because we're free. Solve the underlying problem and we won't have to worry about bombs on our airplanes.

Airport security is about the War on Drugs

Not only in America, but in Australia, too. I was unaware that suspected drug couriers undergo hospital exams to confirm that they have drugs stashed internally. So Australia is going to start installing penetrating x-ray machines at airports so suspects can opt for the x-ray, presumably to clear their name and not miss their flight with a fruitless hospital visit.

Australia doesn't use the naked scanners (if I recall correctly, they have been banned by the parliament there) and plans to have only very limited use of these new x-ray scanners. However, am I the only one who thinks it's crazy that we spend so much time, effort, and money tracking down idiots who swallow heroin balloons but are otherwise not hurting anyone? This drug war stuff is ridiculous and it is good cover for the ballooning power of the TSA.

A brave doctor; and some international info

The UK's Daily Mail reports on a doctor who was refused boarding when he refused to be scanned for health reasons. Apparently,

It is mandatory for passengers to go through the full body scanners at Manchester, Gatwick and Heathrow airports, and staff there have been told that anyone who refuses should not be allowed to board.

And, there is also this information about Italy:

The Italian government had planned to install full body scanners at all airports and train stations but removed them from airports, calling them ‘slow and ineffective’.

Status of scanners in Eurozone

For now, it looks like the EU will not follow in the TSA's footsteps:

While TSA is committed to the widespread introduction of body-scanning machines at US airports, the EU's European Economic and Social Committeeadvised against their use at EU airports, asserting the technology is "not yet sufficiently fit for purpose and more consideration needs to be given to the alternatives."