Author |
Message |
Amnesia10
Legend
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 2:02 am Posts: 29240 Location: Guantanamo Bay (thanks bobbdobbs)
|
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/trave ... -scan.htmlSince when did the Koran ban women going through body scanners.
_________________Do concentrate, 007... "You are gifted. Mine is bordering on seven seconds." https://www.dropbox.com/referrals/NTg5MzczNTkhttp://astore.amazon.co.uk/wwwx404couk-21
|
Wed Mar 03, 2010 12:27 pm |
|
 |
paulzolo
What's a life?
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 6:27 pm Posts: 12251
|
Muslims like to be martyrs - whether it’s blowing themselves up or just being banned from places by not conforming. It appears to be their way. Nothing to see here. Business as usual. Move along.
|
Wed Mar 03, 2010 12:43 pm |
|
 |
davrosG5
I haven't seen my friends in so long
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 6:37 am Posts: 6954 Location: Peebo
|

I suspect that the relgious grounds come down the modesty and public decency guidance or (sharia) law in some interpretations of the Koran and subsequent judgemetns of Muslim scholars.
As the scanner essentially shows a semi-naked image of the person being scanned to an unkown person then the woman presumably felt it was incompatible with the varriation of Islam she follows.
She declined on medical (some sort of infection) and religious grounds. Quite what sort of infection would be a problem for the scanner is a little curious but I suspect some sort of rash. Whether such a thing would show up I'm not sure.
As far as I can tell from the article the women refused to be scanned and so was not permitted to fly and left the airport peacefully. It's not even clear whether the article has been written as a result of a complaint by one of the woman or if the story came from the airport.
I don't think it's fair to say she was being a martyr. If she'd kicked up a huge fuss about religious persecution then that would be different. I doubt she'll be the last person to refuse to be scanned and I doubt it'll just be muslim woman who refused to be scanned either.
_________________ When they put teeth in your mouth, they spoiled a perfectly good bum. -Billy Connolly (to a heckler)
|
Wed Mar 03, 2010 1:02 pm |
|
 |
rustybucket
I haven't seen my friends in so long
Joined: Thu Jun 18, 2009 5:10 pm Posts: 5836
|
The first woman declined on religious grounds i.e. that to be viewed would be immodest.
It was a second woman, companion of the first, that refused on medical grounds
Good for them I say. The scanners are a by-proxy stripsearch and, without reasonable cause, arguably a breach of ECHR Art. 5,6,8,9 & 10.
_________________Jim
|
Wed Mar 03, 2010 1:41 pm |
|
 |
Amnesia10
Legend
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 2:02 am Posts: 29240 Location: Guantanamo Bay (thanks bobbdobbs)
|
I have my concerns about the scanners as well, but am happy enough to be padded down. If someone is not well then they should not have checked in. They should have contacted their doctor first. So that eliminates the medical grounds. The scanners really should be a last measure for those that fit the profile or are going to or from certain destinations.
_________________Do concentrate, 007... "You are gifted. Mine is bordering on seven seconds." https://www.dropbox.com/referrals/NTg5MzczNTkhttp://astore.amazon.co.uk/wwwx404couk-21
|
Wed Mar 03, 2010 2:18 pm |
|
 |
hifidelity2
I haven't seen my friends in so long
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 1:03 pm Posts: 5041 Location: London
|
Given that a frequent flyer may be required to have a number of scans a year I wonder how much x-ray dose you are getting given that there is a recommended annual maximum
Also can I get “Airport Scanner pants” to either - Protect the vital parts thaI do not want irradiated Or - Ones impregnated with something that will show a “bigger shadow” a sort of x-ray scanner wonder bra (pants) for men
|
Wed Mar 03, 2010 3:07 pm |
|
 |
l3v1ck
What's a life?
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 10:21 am Posts: 12700 Location: The Right Side of the Pennines (metaphorically & geographically)
|
What happened to the option of being patted down/frisked instead? I thought that was an alternative given for people who had privacy fears when the scanners were first brought in.
|
Wed Mar 03, 2010 5:02 pm |
|
 |
Linux_User
I haven't seen my friends in so long
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 3:29 pm Posts: 7173
|
That conveniently went out the window after the attempted bombing in the USA. Once the government realised it had enough political capital to push these through it threw privacy concerns and all previous concessions to the wind and implemented the scanners anyway.
|
Wed Mar 03, 2010 5:08 pm |
|
 |
gavomatic57
Doesn't have much of a life
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 8:30 pm Posts: 1757 Location: Cardiff, Wales
|
As women are being targetted by miscreants for terrorism duties (apparently), this is potentially a near miss for the other passengers.
The airlines are welcome to use any rules they like to keep their multi-million dollar planes (and by extension, their passengers) safe. If it doesn't fit in with organised religion of any sort, all the better. If you can't be at least padded down on medical grounds, you probably shouldn't be flying anyway.
You could argue that it is all a bit 1984-ish, but when it comes to being a few thousand feet up, travelling 500mph in an aluminium can, it just isn't worth taking chances!
_________________ G.
Last edited by gavomatic57 on Wed Mar 03, 2010 5:16 pm, edited 2 times in total.
|
Wed Mar 03, 2010 5:13 pm |
|
 |
l3v1ck
What's a life?
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 10:21 am Posts: 12700 Location: The Right Side of the Pennines (metaphorically & geographically)
|
Great [/sarcasm] So that means next time I pass through EMA someone's going to be laughing at how big my stomach is and how small my penis is.  ......  [/joking]
|
Wed Mar 03, 2010 5:13 pm |
|
 |
big_D
What's a life?
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 8:25 pm Posts: 10691 Location: Bramsche
|
It doesn't use X-rays, but saying that, it isn't known what side effects this process has, the manufacturers claim that it is harmless... 
_________________ "Do you know what this is? Hmm? No, I can see you do not. You have that vacant look in your eyes, which says hold my head to your ear, you will hear the sea!" - Londo Molari
Executive Producer No Agenda Show 246
|
Wed Mar 03, 2010 5:20 pm |
|
 |
Amnesia10
Legend
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 2:02 am Posts: 29240 Location: Guantanamo Bay (thanks bobbdobbs)
|
I think that the process uses what it calls T Rays. They are much weaker than X rays so you could undergo thousand of scanners per year. I am more concerned about the privacy aspect of the scanners. I am sure that they must have a print out option for court proceedings.
_________________Do concentrate, 007... "You are gifted. Mine is bordering on seven seconds." https://www.dropbox.com/referrals/NTg5MzczNTkhttp://astore.amazon.co.uk/wwwx404couk-21
|
Wed Mar 03, 2010 5:47 pm |
|
 |
davrosG5
I haven't seen my friends in so long
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 6:37 am Posts: 6954 Location: Peebo
|
AFAIK the T stands for terahertz as that's the region of the electromagnetic spectrum it's from. T-rays sit between the far infra-red and the microwave band of the electromagnetic spectrum so are pretty much at the opposite end of the spectrum from x-rays.
_________________ When they put teeth in your mouth, they spoiled a perfectly good bum. -Billy Connolly (to a heckler)
|
Wed Mar 03, 2010 5:59 pm |
|
 |
Geiseric
Doesn't have much of a life
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 10:35 pm Posts: 1657 Location: Ipswich
|
 Totally agree (+1)
|
Wed Mar 03, 2010 7:30 pm |
|
 |
phantombudgie
Doesn't have much of a life
Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2009 1:45 pm Posts: 994
|
I take it you don't fly with Ryanair either then 
|
Wed Mar 03, 2010 11:17 pm |
|
|