• Media Enquiries

    07505 448925(24hr)

Invasion of the full body scanners

Back in October, Big Brother Watch reported on the news that Manchester Airport was to trial new full body scanners, offering a note of caution about who was watching, where the images might be going, and why they needed to be quite so graphic.

Bodyscan Now, in the wake of the so-called 'pants bomber', Gordon Brown has announced plans to install these body scanners at all UK airports.

Once again, we are left unconvinced by the security surrounding the images produced and who is looking at them. Just to remind you, these scanners produce what is essentially a naked image of the passenger; showing up piercings, implants and crucially, private parts.

But there is also now emerging a general consensus that not only are these scanners massively intrusive, they also are only of limited effectiveness.

As reported by the Daily Mail:

Tory MP Ben Wallace, who worked on the scanners at defence research organisation QinetiQ before entering Parliament in 2005, said the £100,000 ‘millimetre wave’ machines would not have stopped syringe bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab from trying to mount his attack on Christmas Day

‘The millimetre wave technology is harmless, quick and can be deployed overtly or covertly. But it cannot detect chemicals or light plastics' he said.

And in the Daily Telegraph today:

Swabbing airline passengers and their hand luggage for chemicals is cheaper, easier and more effective than the hotly-debated use of X-ray style body scanners, according to two top former US government security officials.

Supporters of the trace detection tests say not only are they easy and quick but also cheap – the one-off capital start-up costs would be about $40 million to cover all flights to the US, plus at most another $10 million a year to run. By contrast, the X-ray style scanners are expensive, raise privacy issues for some and may not pick up devices hidden in body folds and cavities.

Any scheme is likely to have its critics, but as the criticism mounts, one has to ask if we are getting any real return for what is going to be a massive outlay installing these scanners?

Or are we just witnessing yet another unwarranted invasion into our personal liberty in the name of fighting terror?

By Dylan Sharpe

Posted on January 4, 2010 by Big Brother Watch Posted in Body Scanners
  • opsimath

    You wrote: Any scheme is likely to have its critics, but as the criticism mounts, one has to ask if we are getting any real return for what is going to be a massive outlay installing these scanners?
    Or are we just witnessing yet another unwarranted invasion into our personal liberty in the name of fighting terror?
    Do you always ask rhetorical questions?

  • Bob Kapiti

    Since these are essentially being installed at the behest of the US authorities shouldn’t they pay for them?

  • http://faustiesblog.blogspot.com FaustiesBlog

    To your final sentence, yes.
    Leg-Iron has a terrific piece on this (also available from a link at the top of my sidebar).
    The government wins in several ways. They gain greater control over us, they gain more information on us and their buddies get great jobs/contracts.
    All for some precautionary principle?

  • JUST SAY NO

    Just refuse to go through the scanner they will then have to pat you down, these scanners produce very low levels of X-rays it is a health risk to your baby or young child to be put through one of these machines, you cannot be compelled to put your health at risk that would be a violation of your Human Rights. Why are people so terrified to JUST SAY NO, the people of Britain today seem no better than these people who lived under Soviet rule they were afraid to speak out, ask yourself the question are you afraid to SAY NO? your answer will reveal to you what kind of country you now live in.