What's new

Muslim Woman Refuses Body Scan At Airport, Must be other ways to check

Hyde

SENIOR MODERATOR
Joined
Oct 20, 2008
Messages
20,543
Reaction score
20
Country
Pakistan
Location
United Kingdom
Muslim Woman Refuses Body Scan At Airport, Must be other ways to check
A Muslim woman was barred from boarding a flight after she refused to undergo a full body scan for religious reasons.

The passenger was passing through security at Manchester Airport when she was selected at random for a full-body scanner.

She was warned that she would be stopped from boarding the plane but she decided to forfeit her ticket to Pakistan rather than submit to the scan. Her female travelling companion also declined to step into the scanner, citing “medical reasons” for her refusal.

The two women are thought to be the first passengers to refuse to submit to scanning by the machines, which have provoked controversy among human rights groups.

They were introduced on a limited basis last month at Heathrow and Manchester airports in response to the alleged attempt by Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab to blow up a jet over Detroit on Christmas Day using explosives concealed in his underpants.

The X-ray machines allow security officials to check for concealed weapons but they also afford clear outlines of passengers’ genitals. They are due to be introduced in all airports by the end of the year.

Civil liberties campaigners have said the scans represent an invasion of privacy and their introduction may yet be challenged by the Human Rights Commission.

Trevor Phillips, head of the commission, has told Lord Adonis, the Transport Secretary, that there are concerns over passengers’ privacy and an apparent lack of safeguards to ensure that the scanners are used without discrimination.

Sources at Manchester Airport have said the two women were due to board a flight two weeks ago when they were turned back at security.

No other passengers had objected to the checks and about 15,000 have so far submitted to the piercing eye of the £80,000 Rapiscan machine at the airport’s Terminal 2.

The second female passenger was said to be concerned because she had an infection. They may be the first to be turned back for their refusal to be scanned, though a spokesman for Heathrow said it could not comment on individual cases.

At Manchester, a spokeswoman 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 who are selected under the new rules and we are aware that privacy concerns are on our customers’ minds, which is why we have put strict procedures to reassure them that their privacy will be protected.”

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.

Objectors to the scanners, and indeed the two women who forfeited their flight last month, have an unlikely ally in Pope Benedict XVI, a man who is likely to be waved through airport security for the rest of his life.

Last month he told an audience from the aerospace industry that, notwithstanding the threat from terrorism, “the primary asset to be safeguarded and treasured is the person, in his or her integrity”.

Source: Muslim woman refuses body scan at airport - Times Online
 
. . .
Cant there be any other methods to detect weapons??

I agree. I too was under the impression that those who do not wish to go through this process, same old conventional method is applied to them. However I think I was wrong. The incident turned out differently.

My point, a person should be free to choose either of them. People should be convinced, but not forced for this. At the end, it is personal choice which matters.
 
.
Yes, if one does not want body scan, then they should be frisked (by women officers in this case) the old fashioned way. Not allowing to board is a bit too much.

Also, maybe they can use female officers for the body scan of women???
 
.
I agree. I too was under the impression that those who do not wish to go through this process, same old conventional method is applied to them. However I think I was wrong. The incident turned out differently.

My point, a person should be free to choose either of them. People should be convinced, but not forced for this. At the end, it is personal choice which matters.

Is it for all or they just select someone randomly??

I think science has such a massive progress in the recent times and there are more modern tech to detect any weapon and i also dont think that anyone can conceal weapons or explosive in undergarments.
 
.
Also, maybe they can use female officers for the body scan of women???

The problem is the storage of the naked images in their data system not the man or woman officers scaning them.
 
.
Is it for all or they just select someone randomly??

I think science has such a massive progress in the recent times and there are more modern tech to detect any weapon and i also dont think that anyone can conceal weapons or explosive in undergarments.

It is not weapons alone. There are drugs, precious metals etc. etc.
 
.
I agree Scanner is to save time consumed in individual frisking, so if few people have problem they can be given that option, however it is totally mental state of mind to think someone will see you nude etc. It happens when you grow conservative. I have no problem, best thing is do not think about it. All that has to be done is these photos should not be stored.
 
.
Cant there be any other methods to detect weapons??

Ladies officers can take "female passengers" to private room and check them properly

for mens its ok..... since 99% mens don't care about their images being stored like that or they can also check them in a private area if they have any kind of doubts

i don't mind scanners....... but if anybody do not wish to pass through these scanners..... they can should have alternative ways too

Did you guyz look at post number 2?
 
.
It is not weapons alone. There are drugs, precious metals etc. etc.

At Indian and Pakistani airports they carry manual body search of women and hardly anyone gets away with concealing drugs, metals in undergarments.

:) a simple detector can detect the metalic things :)
 
.
I agree Scanner is to save time consumed in individual frisking, so if few people have problem they can be given that option, however it is totally mental state of mind to think someone will see you nude etc. It happens when you grow conservative. I have no problem, best thing is do not think about it. All that has to be done is these photos should not be stored.

:what: mental state of mind

come on dear you know that nudity is the worst thing for ladies to face. i dont know about the standards or values in other parts but if you come to subcontinent then indeed for us its something very uncomfortable.


Besides if the UK or any country in the west having this same system of checking if they start selling the nude prints lolzz they can earn a lot of amount.


After all we have seen the private videos of some celeberties being sold without their consent. Nothing can be ruled out.
 
.
^Here by manual body search they dont check ur underpants.
 
.
Expect Muslim women to repeatedly refuse the body scan. Initially there was a choice, now for no logical reason they've made it mandatory since Feb this year.

The scanning takes more time than a pat-down through frisking. Major curb of civil liberties here.
 
.
They were quite within their rights to refuse & the airline was quite within it's rights to refuse to let them fly. But it sure is a dumb reason to bring religion into this.. A friend of mine was saying he's seen many, including his own mother getting an ex ray in Saudi Airport.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom