|
 
    
|
New Airport Scanners - Indignation, Not Only Against Terrorists
By Abdul-Lateef Balogun
G.I.S. Analyst - Malaysia
It is almost two weeks since the alleged attempt by a Nigerian to blow up an aircraft over Detroit. Numerous measures are being put in place globally to forestall a recurrence of such brazen acts, and chief among those is the installation of full-body scanners at airports.
For an act that leaves nothing but destruction, pain, and anguish in its wake, it seems that aviation authorities feel that it is their responsibility to do everything possible, including a virtual stripping of all passengers, to enhance security at airports.
Most airports around the world presently rely on metal detectors and X-ray machines for routine checks, and their limitations were apparent in the botched plane attack in December. Much more advanced than these systems, the full-body scanners can reveal hidden objects that metal detectors fail to reveal. They can strip away layers of clothing, perfectly showing the contours and shape of the body, in addition to dangerous objects like explosives, plastic weapons, ceramics, and chemical materials.
The millimeter-wave body scanners, which are about to be installed (or already installed) in major airports in countries like the US, the UK, the Netherlands, and Nigeria, deliver 3-D images of air-bound passengers. So explicit will the produced images be that the process is being likened to undergoing a physical examination in a doctor's office, without any shred of clothing on. The 3-D images leave virtually nothing to the imagination.
Each passenger is expected to walk into a large portal (9 feet by 6 feet), after which the machine will take two scans in approximately 2 seconds, making use of electromagnetic waves to create an image based on the energy reflected from the body. It will take another 40 seconds or thereabouts for the generated image of the passenger's body, without clothing, to be transmitted on a computer screen being viewed by security officers.
High Price for Safety
Since the device generates less radiation than traditional X-ray machines, proponents are shoving fears and concerns over likely health implications aside. Complaints about privacy are being countered by claims that the officers eyeing the images will be put in a separate location so as not to identify the person in the image. As the number of countries using these machines increases, however, it is hard to believe that all of them will be equally discreet.
Whenever matters concerning the protection of lives and property are being discussed, all other issues are often relegated to the background — more so if it is a matter of national security, such as blowing up a plane mid-air.
While there is little wonder that many people are in support of this new technology, many others are of the conviction that tactics adopted to combat crime should be much more dignifying than such "bare it all" techniques.
Nalina, a PhD researcher in the field of 3-D city models, is worried the captured images might be used for other purposes in the future. Repeated assurances from operators of the technology that the equipment does not capture facial details are not enough to allay her fears.
"I don't believe them. There are cases in the past where similar private information was later made public," said the Sri Lankan. "They can develop software to identify potential threats. The suspect should then be singled out for the full-body scan. They shouldn't subject everybody to this," she explained to IslamOnline.net (IOL).
Sharing her views, German national Andreas is equally concerned about privacy issues. The fact that the government of his country has made it clear it will not be installing the highly invasive scanners for now does not make him less concerned.
"Safety has its price, but there has to be some compromise," he told IOL. "If they can keep the images safe and private, then it is OK. I suggest they work on other solutions that won't infringe on people's privacy."
For Yahya, his case is more bewildering. He hails from Yemen, one of the 14 countries presently in the bad books of America's various anti-terrorism outfits. Apart from passing through the scanners, he believes that he is likely to be singled out for special inspection and given an equally unpleasant full-body pat-down.
"This is very bad. They should do whatever they have to in order to guarantee the safety of all passengers, but we shouldn't be subjected to this type of humiliation. It is unfortunate that there isn't anything an individual can do about this. People have to come together to fight it."
Reminded that he had an option not to visit the few countries presently installing the controversial scanners, he responded, "I don't think I have a choice because I constantly need to travel for educational purposes, but I will never allow my wife or kids to pass through them. They are better off staying back home."
Double Loss
Not shying away from the truth of the matter, Stephen Phipson, president of the world's largest manufacturer of full-body scanners, admits that privacy concerns are quite genuine. "The privacy concerns are valid but our software can blur out parts of the body," he told Time magazine.
Apart from the grave privacy issues, another concern for pundits is the possible health implication of being exposed to the scanners. Though developers say the machine produces less radiation than cell phones, some health and safety advocates are anything but impressed.
Dr. John Gofman, a retired professor formerly at the University of California, Berkeley, said, "Ionizing radiation, in any amount, is inherently unsafe." On the other hand, Dr. Albert J. Fornace, a molecular oncology expert at the Georgetown University Medical Center, says that the amount of radiation involved here is too low to cause problems, though he admits that completely avoiding any form of radiation remains the safest bet for a healthy life.
If the developers could guarantee the efficacy of these scanners in preventing future acts of terrorism, they might be able to sway a few more people to their side. But for a technology that has been described as fashionable, yet unproven, the present pessimism surrounding its introduction is understandable.
The scanners are being criticized for their inability to detect low-density materials like liquids, powders, and thin pieces of plastic. Similarly, it is said that they lack the ability to identify explosives hidden internally inside a body cavity. Hence, any swallowed or inserted object will most likely escape unnoticed.
Aside from the apparent limitations in realizing the purpose for which these scanners were designed, the financial implication of installing them is yet another factor that will most probably impede adopting them on a global scale. At a staggering cost of US$150,000–170,000, they certainly do not come cheap. If airports are compelled to install them at any cost, then passengers should expect to bear the brunt of this financially.
Controversy is certainly not alien to this technology and its proponents. An earlier attempt to introduce it in Europe two years ago was met with stiff opposition by European parliament members who felt the use of the scanners would violate passenger's privacy rights. Not much seems to have changed since then, as most countries still do not appear too keen on installing them.
While terrorists' threats cannot be dismissed with a wave of the hand, it is doubtful that the introduction of these scanners will provide a veritable solution to the global menace. The time might just be ripe for developers to go back to the drawing board and come up with a comprehensive package fully equipped with the capability of detecting all potential threats without subjecting passengers to any form of ridicule.
It is unlikely that such an effective technology, which places a premium on passengers' dignity and privacy, will be met with the kind of outrage and condemnation being expressed now. As it is, not many passengers will like to pay more for being stripped, albeit virtually, in a most humiliating manner every time they visit certain airports.
http://www.islamonline.net/servl ... Science%2FHSELayout |
|
