October 01, 2010

Ranty Says No.




(For those interested in the details: Ranty's boobs are smaller. But only slightly).









I am happy to report that I caused a bit of a fuss at Schiphol on Tuesday morning.

I went to the gate (D6) to clear security for my Aberdeen flight. As I handed the wifey my boarding card I saw people merrily leaping into the full body scanner. I said, "I'm not going in that thing. Is there an option of a pat down?". She said, "Ask the security guy".

I walked over and he, a strapping bloke of around 6' 8", said "Just step into the scanner please".

"No", says I.

"Erm, what?", says he.

"I am not going in there. They aren't safe. And they violate my privacy. What are my options?".

"They are perfectly safe", he says, "They use sound waves. This does not use back-scatter technology".

"I don't care what it uses. I am am not going in".

"Okay", he says, still being pretty friendly, "Come through the normal one and I will pat you down".

I go through, no alarms go off, and he pats me down. Gives me the all clear and shows me how this "new" scanner works as someone comes through. "It's harmless" he opines.

I said I would research the machine, made by L3.

Meanwhile, about seven people were now lining up to come through the old style x-ray jobbie. "No, no" says the big guy, "You must use the scanner".

Like meek little lambs the queue shifts to come through the full body thing.

Stood my ground and got what I wanted. I was prepared for the worst, which would have been to wait four hours for the next flight and hope that it was at a gate that didn't use these invasive machines. If not, I would have waited longer.  




NOTE: Visitors to Spidey's blog will know that I have re-used my comment to create this post. I also nicked his picture.





As a result of Richards comment, I did some digging. Not as simple as you would imagine. Statutes are written in a language that looks similar to English, but it isn't. Using keywords to search a document would be easy enough on any other website, but this is a government website so it is as complex as it is frustrating. I read through the entire Act, which is made up of 12 pages of guff and I still could not find anything related to body scanners that Manchester Airport insisted was there.


Anyhoo, I found a document here, which, like all statutes/statutory instruments, contradicts itself. (I did NOT find this as an amendment to the existing Act. Just in a Word document. So it could well be meaningless).



This is on page 7:


"Communications will be available at the security screening area to inform passengers that “For the benefit of all passengers' security, passengers may be required to be screened using body scanning equipment. Screening will be conducted by security officers acting on behalf of the airport operator. Images of passengers will not be saved.” Airport operators must provide to persons selected for screening the opportunity to provide details of their age, gender, race, ethnic origin and religion or beliefs." (Emphasis is mine).

But on page 8, we see this:

"An effective communication strategy should be developed to inform people of the security requirements where body scanners are deployed. It should be made clear at the earliest possible stage that all passengers selected for screening by a body scanner must be scanned.  If a passenger declines to be scanned that passenger must be refused access to the Restricted Zone, with the result that the passenger will not be able to fly. Information should be adequate, clear and provided ideally before ticket purchase. In any event it must be provided prior to entering the passenger screening area. Information should also be readily available in a number of languages appropriate for the profile of passengers using the airport."  (Again, my emphasis).

Which is it, then? May, or must? And just who the fuck do you think you are? No-one, absolutely no-one, has the right to deny me travel anywhere in the United Kingdom. I am sovereign. I am supreme. I am a Freeman. My right to travel in my own country is carved in stone. It was carved in stone 50 years before the first parliament was even formed. And since they didn't make the law, they cannot delete, or even change the law. We have not granted them that right.

I will be refusing to step into these pervy, dangerous, useless machines for as long as I have breath.

What you do is up to you. But know this: the more of us that refuse, the more noise we make, the swifter these abominations will be unplugged and dumped. They are only operating because you keep jumping into them.

Say no. 

FFS, say no.


CR.

27 comments:

Harbinger said...

'Ranty's Revolution'!

Well done for standing your ground. They aren't safe and they're a total invasion of privacy.

Captain Ranty said...

Thanks H.

I am still (slightly) stunned that no-one else refused.

They are too used to obeying orders. However bloody stupid those orders are.

CR.

Smoking Hot said...

I've refused these stupid scanners and always will do. Unfortunayely the rest of the passengers are just like sheep. Not many say no, they obey the uniform! Bah!

Captain Ranty said...

Good for you SH!

That's how we defeat them every time.

Enn. Oh.

Simples!

CR.

microdave said...

I assume the "Pat Down" didn't reveal the pistol you appear to have stuffed up your arse....

Captain Ranty said...

No Dave, they missed that.

I hoovered it back in just before the big lad came at me.

CR.

FireballXL5 said...

Well done for refusing. I knew they were in invasion of privacy, which is why I object, but I didn't realise they were harmful.

I can see why they'd want to pull in fit looking blondes though :-)

For my part, the previous raft of "security measures", take your belt and shoes off etc. were the last straw so I don't fly anywhere now. Horrendous way of getting round anyway, treated like shit, rammed in like a load of sheep and not even fed or watered unless you submit to being severely fleeced.

I travel continuously and freely around the UK and Europe in the comfort of my motorhome, which also doubles up as my survival capsule :-) All part of staying under the radar.

Harbinger said...

CR,

"I am still (slightly) stunned that no-one else refused."

They didn't because they are conditioned - resistance is futile and all that.

You are a shepherd and they are sheep. That's how simple it is to understand all of this.

You say "No!"
They say "Baaaa!"

Barking Spider said...

Nice one, CR, good on you for refusing. I will never go through one of those things. The privacy issues were already unacceptable but this has now gone far beyond privacy issues - safe levels of radiation render the scanners useless and pointless so as well as making their scanners function properly, (Perv Level set to Max), the bastards are trying to kill us off.

Not this awkward bastard, they're not!

Fascist Hippy said...

I'm waiting for the day a guy goes through one of these with a 'lazy lob' on and the female operator of it has him done for exposure or perversion.

Anonymous said...

Ranty,

Am finding all this stuff fascinating to read. Is there any way for you to introduce a tag system onto your blog as I am trying to get up to speed on the HMRC battle.

Well done, by the way.

Dangermouse

James Higham said...

Was wifey prepared to wait for the next plane though?

Gordon the Fence Post Tortoise said...

Right-oh

One Rule for us and....

I understand that the technology is moving apace and that cubicles will be redundant fairly soon anyway.

I understand Americans have clothing penetrating scanners that can see across the street - damned if I can find the link = DARPA and DHS are in there...

However in my experience the main problem is not the tech but the STAFF


(FYI there's 13 episodes of TTR out there...)

Angry Exile said...

Mate, it's slightly O/T but that image of the naked chick in the scanner was a hoax. Whether it was mischief or someone's guess about what the scans would be like or even deliberate disinformation I have no idea, but faked it most certainly is. Just my 2¢ but I feel arguments against airport security theatre are stronger without something that may have been put out there as a to provide a straw man for Big Brother's supporters to knock down. I might bag The Mail a lot but I think their pic is more like what's actually seen. Still T&A but it's not quite what the faked pic of the hot blonde shows.

Back on topic and good for you for refusing to go through it. Personally even the pat down annoys me - everything about the whole process in which I'm treated as an assumed terrorist rather than a valued customer paying through the nose annoys me. So fuck 'em, if I'm not actually leaving the country I'll take the time and drive. I'd rather burn my own fuel at ground level and enjoy a slow trip than be treated with suspicion and ripped off for an uncomfortable and cramped seat and a few hours of airborne misery.

Wimpie said...

"Advanced Imaging Technology" is a euphemism created to make people think they are getting "scanned." No one is getting "scanned" -- they are getting strip searched.

The fundamental privacy issue is whether our government has the right to make strip searches routine and mandatory.

There is no question that these machines violate the 4th Amendment.

There are also health issues. Researchers are already coming out saying that the machines aren't safe and could cause cancer.

Please check out the brochures at:
http://airportbodyscan.org
http://www.nudeoscope.com
http://ThousandsStandingAround.com
http://scrapthescanners.wordpress.com
http://dontscan.us
http://dontscan.me

and join us on Facebook
All Facebook Against Airport Full Body Scanners
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=239458517874

and join in on Flyertalk.com
Organized resistance to WBI/invasive patdowns
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/travel-safety-security/1119548-organized-resistance-wbi-invasive-patdowns.html

Captain Ranty said...

Dangermouse,

I would introduce a tag system if I knew how. I looked last night but couldn't find the relevant tab.

If anyone can advise this Luddite, please do.

CR.

Captain Ranty said...

James,

The wifey in question was the KLM check-in chick. All she does is wait for planes....

CR.

Captain Ranty said...

Gordon,

Thanks for the links. Will check them out now.

Yes, I do remember seeing a video of a van patrolling the streets in the US and A scanning houses. The technology is definitely here.

Privacy is apparently something we savages don't require anymore.

CR.

Captain Ranty said...

AE,

I think that the truth lies somewhere in between. I am convinced that they do NOT see some lumpen grey image, and I am reasonably sure they are unable to count pubes. Remember that we only know what they want us to know. It is far more comfortable for people to believe a lie than the truth.

What worries me is the ineffectiveness of these damn machines. I ran a video on here where a German TV show demonstrated that a man could get the right chemicals through to concoct a bomb on the plane. Not very reassuring.

And I should clear up one point that I omitted from the piece. I want what they want: I want to fly safe, and I want to come home to my family intact, the way I left. I don't mind a pat down IF the security bloke feels it is necessary, but the scanners are overkill. They may or may not be pervy paradise for some airport freak, but I am unwilling to step in and out of them as if it were normal. It isn't.

I wish I had your resolve, AE. Sadly, I am an impatient git, and even flying at 500mph is too slow for me. Driving long distances drives me insane. I can't wait for matter transportation technology to arrive. Travelling anywhere in the blink of an eye. That's what we need. We can test the technology on kiddie-fiddling Catholic priests and child-raping Muslims first.

CR.

Captain Ranty said...

Wimpie,

Thanks for visiting, and thanks for those links.

I will check them out.

Not wishing to lay blame here, but I strongly believe that it was your lot who started this. With that ridiculous Homeland Security Act.

Of course, Bush was its father and 9/11 was its mother. The bastard child responsible for ripping your Constitution to shreds was the HSA.

You guys need to get a grip on the federal government. A revolution would do nicely.

CR.

Angry Exile said...

Cap'n, I'm sure you get to see a certain amount and since the link to the Fail was a couple of years old it's a safe bet that they've improved resolution and put in false colour just like with X-Rays. It won't be anything like the pic at the top, which was a nude model with the colours reversed once and then back again in Pshop or similar, and therefore ends up with her real skin tones. I'd bet it goes on density so metals are one colour, plastics another, watery liquids a third and so on. All skin will probably look the same regardless of real skin tone. What's there probably won't be particularly titillating but will be invasive in that airport staff will be able to see who's had boob jobs or intimate piercings and who, apart from themselves, has a tiny cock. This has already happened, so I'm certainly not questioning the invasive aspect.

But like I said, I consider it invasive and an imposition to take off my boots and so I'll avoid flying at all if I don't have to go overseas or be somewhere fast. If the Israelis - the Israelis that are on the death lists of more than half the world's fucknuts, for Christ's sake - can go from car park to gate in under an hour without having to put up with this shit then I don't see why I have to just to fly to fucking Adelaide. Fuck it and fuck them, I'd rather spend the money on petrol and the comfort of my own car. The trouble is that living on a very big island that's not always an option, and don't the bastards know it.

BTW, if you want I'll have a look and see if I can find the link for the tag cloud I used. I'm no expert and I managed to install it without blowing anything up, and now it just sits there as a widget that can be moved around the page as I like.

richard said...

Captain, have a look at Virgin's new advert. Body scanners are sexy after all.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eu8J2yxWhpU

Captain Ranty said...

AE,

I remember the TSA story. I also read your great Israeli piece when you wrote it. I remember being a little surprised. I was supposed to go there, to a town called Netanya, but I never went there, I ended up in Italy instead. Rumours at the time were that the "interrogations" on the way in and out were hard going.

I'd be grateful for any help with tagging. I had assumed Dangermouse wanted to see tags below each piece. I have seen this "tag cloud" of which you speak on other blogs. I'm not sure which is the best approach.

Thanks.

CR.

Captain Ranty said...

Richard,

I was going to say how clever it was of Vigin to slip in the scanner as if it were sexy, natural and safe.

I really think that it was by design.

We will swallow just about anything, won't we?

CR.

FireballXL5 said...

These "what the butler saw" machines are totally unnecessary anyway, the simple answer, as we all know, is profiling.

When I'm queueing behind the old lady who is having to suffer the indignity of removing her shoes, having handbag rifled etc, it makes me want to cry out loud "FFS what are you doing, she's not going to blow the plane up, her poor husband probably fought and died just so twats like you can prod us along like cattle".

We all know who the likely bombers are, but of course "yumanrites" stops us pulling them out in case they play the discrimination card.

Angry Exile said...

No worries. Drop me a line with your email via the Contact Me at mine if you like. Personally I use both the tag cloud and tags below the posts, but if you don't use many you could just do the second one. Or maybe just a simple list in the sidebar, or even tabbed buttons at the top.

We will swallow just about anything, won't we?

I think the trolley dollies might.

Sorry. Had to be done.

sorted said...

They should build scanners that detonate anyone who is carrying something dodgy. With suitable blast proof walls to protect other passengers.