Magnetic Poles
New Member
So what is going on. Will any politician take this seriously? Scan everybody under their clothes EXCEPT Muslims? I don't see this going anywhere.
CLICK HERE
CLICK HERE
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Muslim-American Group Says Airport Scanners Violate Islamic Law
- Thread starter Magnetic Poles
- Start date
It's going to be a matter for the courts.
"It is a violation of clear Islamic teachings that men or women be seen naked by other men and women," reads the fatwa. "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."
"But the TSA said the scanners do not produce photos. Rather, it said, the images "look like chalk outlines."
Of course there is also the alternative of allowing people to request a screener of the same sex as the person going through scanner that could be the compromise to satisfy all parties here.
I think it is a silly issue myself.
"It is a violation of clear Islamic teachings that men or women be seen naked by other men and women," reads the fatwa. "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."
"But the TSA said the scanners do not produce photos. Rather, it said, the images "look like chalk outlines."
Of course there is also the alternative of allowing people to request a screener of the same sex as the person going through scanner that could be the compromise to satisfy all parties here.
I think it is a silly issue myself.
Steven2006
New Member
I can respect someone who's is devout and has personal religious beliefs. However if they feel that strongly they should abstain from flying rather than insist all of society compromise on rules of safety.
Or fly private charter.
I don't know MP. I understand that there must be airline safety and that I have this automatic knee-jerk reaction when Muslims whine, but I just looked at some of those images.
You DO see clear anatomical body parts. It's not like an x-ray.
I would not be comfortable if a man were doing the screening on me. And I would be very uncomfortable if I had a 16-year-old daughter or son that was being screened.
It would seem fiscally unsound to hire TWO screeners. A man for the men and a woman for the women and children. That would be double the payroll.
I don't know what the answer is. I've got to think on this some more.
You DO see clear anatomical body parts. It's not like an x-ray.
I would not be comfortable if a man were doing the screening on me. And I would be very uncomfortable if I had a 16-year-old daughter or son that was being screened.
It would seem fiscally unsound to hire TWO screeners. A man for the men and a woman for the women and children. That would be double the payroll.
I don't know what the answer is. I've got to think on this some more.
FR7 Baptist
Active Member
I think it's reasonable that a person can request to be scanned by a person of the same sex. You can already request that for a pat-down and I think they always have a person of the same sex do more intrusive searches.
mcdirector
Active Member
There is technology available that is thermal sensing.
This is not as good an article as the one I originally saw, but it gets the point across. http://www.governmentvideo.com/article/92150
This is not as good an article as the one I originally saw, but it gets the point across. http://www.governmentvideo.com/article/92150
Then I would think that the airline would make it clear what images reveal and would make it clear that a same-sex screener is available.
I would be content then. :thumbsup:
Steven2006
New Member
Who pays for the salaries, the airlines or the airports? If it is the airlines I could see the possibility that for competitive reasons some might employ both men and women and market it.
Perhaps I should said airport. I don't know who would pay a screener's salary any more than I would know who would pay pilot's salary. :laugh: :laugh:
Steven2006
New Member
I have know idea either, that is why I asked. And Here I thought you knew :laugh:
Robert Snow
New Member
First off, who cares what the Muslims say? I wonder if the United States was worried about what the Japanese said during 1942.
Also, if a Muslim doesn't want to submit, then don't fly.
I wonder if Muslims go to doctors or have surgery.
Also, if a Muslim doesn't want to submit, then don't fly.
I wonder if Muslims go to doctors or have surgery.
It's a religous issue.
Some Muslims are saying that it violates their religious beliefs.
Of course they could take the same approach as the Amish and simply not do something that violates their religious beliefs even if it is not convenient to do so.
But I wouldn't hold my breath.
poncho
Well-Known Member
It violates my religous beliefs to have my naked picture taken, copied and then handed out to airport employees or others. Haven't heard about all that yet?
Heathrow Airport’s denial that Indian film star Shahrukh Khan’s naked body scanner images were printed and circulated by airport staff because the devices have no capability to print or distribute images contradicts leaked government documents that prove the x-ray backscatter machines do have the option to store and send images, as well as actual images of the print outs that are freely available on the Internet.
Heathrow today denied that naked body scanner images of Khan were printed and circulated by airport security staff, telling the London Telegraph the claims were “completely factually incorrect” because the body-scanning equipment had no capability to print images.
The BAA spokeswoman “stressed that images captured by the equipment could not be stored or distributed in any form”.
Heathrow are trying to avoid any investigation into the incident by claiming it “simply could not be true”.
However, leaked government documents obtained by the Electronic Privacy Information Center and confirmed as authentic by CNN show that the devices must have the ability to store and send images when in “test mode.”
“That requirement leaves open the possibility the machines — which can see beneath people’s clothing — can be abused by TSA insiders and hacked by outsiders, said EPIC Executive Director Marc Rotenberg,” according to the report.
“If you look at the actual technical specifications and you read the vendor contracts, you come to understand that these machines are capable of doing far more than the TSA has let on,” added Rotenberg.
Indeed, if there is no capability for the devices to save, distribute and print images, then how on earth have news organizations obtained print outs of such images like the one below?
I'm not surprised if this is new news to most of you here. The corporate media doesn't like reporting on how they've been lying to us about these things. I guess it all depends on how much you trust your government and the corporate lap dog media to be forthcoming and honest with you.
Just be a good citizen and do as your told. Step into the machine and trust us, nobody is going to see your naked body other than a few low paid airport employees and maybe a few others via the world wide web.
Trust us we're the authorities and we know what's best for you. We're keeping tyrants in power and corporate profits rolling in by using one national emergency after another to scare you out of your liberties and into compliance.
Have a nice flight! 
Last edited by a moderator:
Well you do have the same choices as the rest of us.
You could simply choose not to fly and find alternative transportation.
BTW - who is that you think would be interested in your naked picture?
I personally am not worried about it as of late.
Perhaps a few years ago when I was in better shape... :smilewinkgrin:
1. No one is forcing a Muslim to fly - there are other options
2. It is against American law to blow up airplanes.
DEAL WITH IT!!!
Here are some other religious issues
1. Mormons were given the choice of giving up polygamy or not be admitted to the union.
2. Jehovah Witness can not prevent their children from receiving a blood transfusion
3. It is illegal for fundamentals in West Virgina to handle snakes as part of their religious worship
2. It is against American law to blow up airplanes.
DEAL WITH IT!!!
Here are some other religious issues
1. Mormons were given the choice of giving up polygamy or not be admitted to the union.
2. Jehovah Witness can not prevent their children from receiving a blood transfusion
3. It is illegal for fundamentals in West Virgina to handle snakes as part of their religious worship
poncho
Well-Known Member
So you've learned to be compliant and do as you're told. Congratulations, you are obviously a good citizen now! :thumbs:
After all good citizens never question the "authorities".
What is your basis for those statements about me?
How am I "compliant"?
How do I "do as I am told"?
What makes you believe that I "never question the authorities"?
A few test questions for you...
When you enter a court building do you refuse to walk through the metal detector?
When you pass through airport security do you refuse to allow your luggage to be scanned?
When stopped for a traffic violation do you refuse to produce your license and proof of insurance?
poncho
Well-Known Member
Irrelevant questions. None of these things requires me to be photographed naked. I'd say if you're willing to believe the government and corporate media that having yourself, your wife, and your children photgraphed naked is going to keep you safe from terrorists you are being compliant to the point that you'll do as your told without question.
In the first place...
This is advertized as a national security matter so a few corporitos can unload a few billion dollars worth of new technology. It has very little if anything to do with national security.
It's a sales pitch geared to frighten the public into accepting ever increasing encroachments into our private lives by big government and the corporations who control it and the mass media.
And, making a nice tidy profit in the meantime.
Second place...
This latest corporate media blitz is designed to frighten us out of our witts and into submitting ourselves to yet another layer of tyranny while denouncing those who refuse as putting the country in greater danger. Obviously lifted right out of the Hermann Goering playbook on how to normalize tyranny and get whole populations to submit themselves to it willingly.
Judging from the replies here I'd say it's working quite well too as very few if any are actually using their witts.
Last edited by a moderator: