Sky Harbor Gets Full Body Scanner
Sky Harbor airport has stepped up security using a high-tech screening tool that examines a person’s body from head to toe. So now that passengers see the body imaging for themselves, what do they think about the privacy concerns?
Read more on FOX 10 Phoenix

College National Finals Rodeo Results
1, Caleb Smidt , Wharton County Community College, 8.8 seconds. 2, Kyle VanBiezen, Idaho State University , 9.8. 3, Ryan Bothum, Connors State College, 10.3. 4, Cory Solomon , Hill College , 11.0. (total on four) 1, Bothum, 42.6 seconds. 2, Smidt, 45.0. 3, Cy Eames, Idaho State University, 45.7. 4, VanBiezen, 50.9. 5, Solomon, 52.7. 6, Tyrell Moody, Douth Dakota State University, 52.7. 7 …
Read more on Connecticut Post

‘Scott Pilgrim vs. The World’ brings the pixel party to E3
As E3 winds down, we can all marvel at the leading-the-way tech of Microsoft’s Kinect and Nintendo’s 3DS, but sometimes a gamer just wants a bit of retro fun. Check out the trailer for “Scott Pilgrim vs. the World”…
Read more on Los Angeles Times

It finally happened. A Muslim woman in Manchester refused to submit to a full-body airport body scanner and was thus barred from boarding her flight. She cited her Muslim faith, which might have been expected, as to why she refused to submit to the scan. I don’t trust the Internet to react to this news with any aplomb whatsoever.

The woman, who was to fly to Pakistan, was randomly selected at the Manchester airport to be scanned. Another woman, her travel buddy, also refused to submit to the body scan, but because of medical reasons.

In the UK, passengers who refuse to submit to body scans once they’ve been selected for one are barred from boarding said flight. There’s no Plan B—you can’t say, “I don’t want to be scanned, but I’ll let you pad me down or whatever.” Scan or go home.

What are you more comfortable with, people refusing to be scanned because of religious reasons or because of health reasons?

What’s also worth mentioning is that the two women were barred from boarding a flight two weeks ago over security concerns. That probably means that they’re being “randomly selected” for scans is total bunk.

The illusion of security continues, I suppose.

Another international airport has adopted those full-body scanners that have proven to be so controversial. Paris’ Charles de Gaulle has installed the machine on a three-month trial basis.

Concerned about being bombarded with millimeter waves? Don’t be, for the head of the country’s Direction Générale de l’Aviation Civile—the French equivalent of the Federal Aviation Authority—says they’re totally safe.

Incidentally, the French seem to be cool with the idea of full-body scanner, if this Le Monde poll is to be believed, with 43 percent of respondents saying they’re in favor of the scanners.

Very exciting all around. Allez les bleus, etc.

Another day, another airport full-body scanner story. It has emerged that the scanners are in violation of Islamic law. Now, before you get all flip and retort, “Yeah, I’m pretty sure they didn’t have microwave millimeter scanners back in the days of Muhammad,” let’s listen to what the people have to say.

The Fiqh Council of North America—obviously you’ve heard of them—has issued a fatwa vis-à-vis the full-body scanners. Here we go!

It is a violation of clear Islamic teachings that men or women be seen naked by other men and women. Islam highly emphasizes haya (modesty) and considers it part of faith. The Quran has commanded the believers, both men and women, to cover their private parts.

Fair enough.

Now, there’s a few things that could solve this little problem. Muslim passengers could elect to be patted down by a TSA dude. That way their nude body isn’t seen by anyone else.

The TSA responded to this kerfuffle with:

TSA’s mission is to keep the traveling public safe. Advanced imaging technologies are an important tool in a multi-layered security system to detect evolving threats such as improvised explosive devices. TSA’s use of these technologies includes strong protections in place to safeguard passenger privacy. Screening images are automatically deleted, and the officer viewing the image will never see the passenger. [People who don't want to be full-body scanned] will receive equivalent screening that may include a physical pat-down, hand-wanding, and other technologies. Physical pat-downs are performed by Transportation Security Officers of the same sex as the passenger in a private screening area, if the passenger requests.

We all know that security is pretty much a joke to begin with—how many times do you hear of people who make it through security with a huge knife in their pocket by mistake?—but at the very least the TSA has provided a pretty reasonable alternative to being full-body scanned.

Keep in mind: these scans are optional. You’ll just have to let Mr. Big Security Guard pat you down. I don’t understand the hubbub—we’re all people, it’s not like there’s any surprises as to what’s going on down there—but I’ll defer to people’s own opinions here.

You’re certainly familiar with those full body scanners, installed at airports to prevent bad guys from bringing bad things aboard airplanes. They scan your body, producing a fairly clear 3D image of your naked body. It’s controversial because, really, who wants their naked body on display so some goon in a uniform can try to see if you have a knife taped against your leg? Oh, that’s your attitude, is it? Well then, no airplane for you! That got weird.

Right, so the scanners are installed in two UK airports, London’s Heathrow and Manchster’s whatever it’s called. (Scanners will soon be hitting the second city, Birmingham.) It just came down that, should you refuse to submit to a full body scan, you won’t be allowed to board the airplane.

That only makes sense. I mean, as far as any of this nonsense can make any sense to begin with. The way it works is, people are selected for full body scans based on certain criteria. Of course, these criteria haven’t been revealed. It’s sort of like winning the lottery, only it’s terribly inconvenient. Congratulations, you have to submit to a full body scan.

The number of people who have said variations of “Well, if you’re not doing anything wrong, why does it bother you?” truly boggles the mind. Way to completely miss the point, sirs.

Oh, whatever. Nobody cares.

There’s more fallout from that botched Christmas Day terror plot, and it’s something regular readers will be familiar with. It looks like the man who tried to blow up that airplane had explosives stitched into his underpants. The result? A push for more widespread use of those full body scanners we’ve been talking about for some time now.

Right now, full body scanners are only available in a few airports around the U.S. (Your standard issue metal detector wouldn’t have found the device in the man’s pants, as it obviously didn’t.) You’d need a fancier detector of some sort, such as a millimeter-wave scanner. Those things aren’t inexpensive, so the debate will be: how much can we afford to spend. Or, cleverly, how much can we afford not to spend?

But before we get into that, I point you in the direction of this illustration of the dangers you face every time you board an airplane.That’s right: there’s a one-in-10.4 million chance that you’ll be involved in any sort of airplane-related terrorist attack.

“We were very lucky this time but we may not be so lucky next time, which is why our defenses must be strengthened,” said Sen. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut. Fair enough, but “might” would be the operative word. But again, if you look at the odds, there’s very little the average person should be concerned about.

Long story short: if you’re not already comfortable with the idea of full body scanner, too bad.