Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 16th Nov 2010 22:34 UTC
In the News As none other I know how problematic it is to discuss matters related to politics on the web. However, every now and then, there's no way around it, and this is one of those moments. There's this thing going on at airports in the US, and while many will see it as a separate issue, the body scanner issue, and the sad stories it has spawned, are symptoms of a far larger problem that is a direct threat to everything we've fought for during and since the Enlightenment.
Permalink for comment 450180
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
darknexus
Member since:
2008-07-15

You say it sarcastically, but you're more right than you know. Those skilled at crime and terror will always get around the security measures. It's a universal principal: Where there is security, there is always someone smart enough to foil it. All the security measures do is give the sheeple an illusion of safety. You can be licensed to carry a firearm on a plane: typically these licenses are given out only to select military officials, but anything can be forged given someone with enough know how and the right equipment. In practice though, there's no real purpose to bring a gun into the plane. Sure they can kill people with it, but typically they want to inspire terror in the living. A plane crash, even with reports of a crazed lunatic with a gun, isn't as heart-jerking as something like 911. They don't just want death, they want to terrorize. Big content using this illusion as a way to push through mandatory device scanning is scary. I am puzzled, however, as to how they're going to scan my drive effectively when I've got it heavily encrypted? I don't at the moment, but if they start doing this you can bet that I will. It's the principal of the thing, they have no right to what doesn't belong to them and the contents of my device belong to me. I'm also puzzled as to how they'd force me to install mandatory monitoring software? Software must be installed or else inserted into hardware, and there's no way I'm installing any software *or* hardware that would do such a thing. I like Windows 7 but it's no big hassle for me to switch to Linux on those machines should it come to that and the monitoring software be inserted into the os itself (very possible). So how exactly are they going to mandate something which, by its very nature, must be installed by the user? Even if they mandate it be put in new machines or Windows itself, they'll not monitor a large majority of the population who either won't be buying new equipment nor upgrading their os. It's not lagistically practical.

Reply Parent Score: 6