[quote]VANCOUVER — Skilled staff trained to interpret human behaviour would provide better airport security than increasingly invasive scanning machines. That's the view of a Simon Fraser University professor and terrorism expert who is predicting the failure of intensified U.S. security measures brought in after the attempted Christmas Day bombing of a jetliner bound for Detroit. Andre Gerolymatos, SFU's head of Hellenic Studies, said the U.S. authorities' "knee-jerk reaction" to bring in full body-scan machines is a bid to reassure passengers rather than effectively protect them. "The facts are that dozens more invasive screening machines are never going to stop determined terrorists," said Gerolymatos. "Sometimes the most simple methods are the most effective, such as having well-trained people who ask intelligent questions and are taught how to read human behaviour." Gerolymatos noted the U.S. is using some full body-scan machines and has requested pat-down searches of passengers from a list of 14 countries. Full body-scan machines are highly-invasive, will deter the travelling public and ultimately don't work, he said. Terrorists will just alter their tactics to evade new machines. Even full-body scans — which produce X-ray like images that can show items hidden under clothing — can't detect explosives secreted in body cavities. "They will just swallow packages of explosives, like drugs," said Gerolymatos. The ramped-up security measures were first implemented shortly after Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, 23, allegedly attempted to blow up a Northwest Airlines flight from Amsterdam to Detroit on Dec. 25. Abdulmutallab, a Nigerian engineering student, allegedly tried to ignite an explosive hidden in his underwear as the aircraft flew over southwestern Ontario. The U.S. failed to heed the intelligence it had from Abdulmutallab's father that his son posed a risk. Nor did anyone act on the agitated young man's failure to check luggage or his insistence on paying for his ticket in cash. Gerolymatos said that harassing mainly-Muslim passengers is not the answer. "A Christian gangster can be paid to carry explosives," he said. On Monday, the Washington-based Council on American-Islamic Relations branded as "profiling" the proposed U.S. screening of people from 13 Muslim-majority countries. "Under these new guidelines, almost every American Muslim who travels to see family or friends or goes on pilgrimage to Mecca will automatically be singled out for special security checks — that's profiling," said CAIR National Executive Director Nihad Awad.[/quote] http://www.theprovince.com/news/Expert+says+high+tech+airport+scanners+stop+determined+terrorist/2405509/story.html

count me among those who don't fly anymore.. not because I'm scared of terrorists, but because I respect civil liberties, especially my own, and simply don't want to be treated like a criminal, if it can be avoided. I haven't flown since 9-11, and have no immediate plans to. Neither have I sworn it off, but if the time came when I caught some grief for paying in cash (I always do- it's the only form of actual legal tender we have) I would just have to turn right around and find another way. Of course, in a couple years, it'll be a moot point anyway. I renewed my license just before new years' so I wouldn't have to deal with the "Secure ID" BS, and they tell me at some point I'll be unable to enter planes and federal buildings, unless I go back and get it.

[b]MattBob_SquarePants wrote:[/b] [quote]Of course, in a couple years, it'll be a moot point anyway. I renewed my license just before new years' so I wouldn't have to deal with the "Secure ID" BS, and they tell me at some point I'll be unable to enter planes and federal buildings, unless I go back and get it.[/quote] Are you referring to putting the chips in licenses? I've only gotten hearsay on it...haven't read anything reliable about it. Is it official that it's going to happen?