Muslim woman grounded after refusing airport’s full body scan - Macleans.ca
 

Muslim woman grounded after refusing airport’s full body scan

First person to object to new UK security procedure


 

In what is believed to be a first, a Muslim woman was banned from flying after refusing to take the full body scan in Manchester airport. The woman, traveling to Islamabad, was selected at random to pass through the new security procedure introduced at both Heathrow and Manchester airports last month. Warned she would not be allowed to board the Pakistan International Airlines flight if she did not comply, she chose to forfeit her ticket. Her female traveling companion also left the airport after citing ”medical reasons” for not wanting to go through the scanner. More than 15,000 people have already passed through the Rapiscan machine at the airport’s Terminal 2.

The Telegraph


 
Filed under:

Muslim woman grounded after refusing airport’s full body scan

  1. This is wrong.

    • There is no excuse under the sun to refuse a (any) security check before embarking on a mass transportation vehicle. Period!

      • This is nearly the equivalent of a strip search. I can completely understand why a woman, particularly a Muslim woman, would object. I'm also pretty sure we can find ways to maintain security while working around this completely reasonable objection.

        • Yes there's been a real epidemic of Christian and Jewish female suicide bombers lately.

      • I'm inclined to agree, BUT, wouldn't a pat down search have been sufficient?

        • So in your opinion an actual physical touching, as in a pat down, would be less objectionable than an impersonal, remote "X-ray" ?? I fail to see that logic.

          • With a pat-down, she knows the person doing the inspection is a woman. With the scanner, she has no idea who's looking at the images. So yes, the pat-down (as long as it's carried out by a female) is probably less objectionable to her.

          • Gaunilon pretty much summed it up. Do you see the logic now?

        • Doubtless you'd think a pat down would be "sufficient" if you were riding a tube in London or a train in Madrid the day after a major terrorism conviction or a 9/11 anniversary too right?

          • Are you suggesting that the terrorists that attacked N.Y. London and Madrid bypassed a pat down search?

      • Sure there is. Like say, you don't want to pass through a machine with questionable health effects in order for some "security" bureaucrat to be able to look at a picture of you without clothes for no good reason, in the name of security threatre.

        These scanners are a huge waste of money, and won't add any real security. Their only purpose is to feed an ever growing bureaucracy that needs excuses to keep wasting money.

      • There are medical issue's that scientist are now stating that the levels of radiation may cause health issues's in the futuer such as cancer. There are religous beliefs issue's. There are moral issues of having someone look at your naked body and perhaps photographing it with a digital camera, cell etc. There are privacy and legal issues as well.

  2. Nice to see airport security measures at work,. Why did the Muslim women refuse to comply? Some reports suggest that British-trained Muslim surgeons are now performing breast implant operations on female suicide bombers in Pakistan. The explosives would be virtually undetectable by any electronic methods currently employed.

  3. Arrest her and fine her for obstruction of justice. Let them pay to take it to court, I’m getting real tired of them.

    • minus ten billion.

    • you racist … who are you refering to by "them?" … not exactly what people want to see in 2010 grow up she has religous bleifs!! face it

      • Err, Islam is a belief/ideology, not a race. There are black Muslims, white Muslims etc. How is that racist?

  4. Random should be written in quotes. :)

  5. Who knows – without a scan it could have been a man. It has been done before.

  6. Did she have an option of a pat down before forfeiting her ticket? I think it's outrageous that a person does not have freedom of choice if this is the case. As for the radiation affects does anyone mention that it is harmful on humans and it is proven fact that radiation will cause cancer and shorten a persons lifespan. Just look at the person who discovered radiation. Why did that person live to a short age?–DO not go through these machines, unless you want to die younger—