This is the fatalist point of view. And sadly, probably true. If we travel, especially internationally as I do, we need to develop personal stategies that maximise our human rights with respect to privacy and inappropriate search or seizure no matter where in the world we might be.

I don't check bags unless absolutely unavoidable (which means I'm travelling with my golf clubs). I request that all my bags are with me in case I've been singled out for further searches. I am always visually vigilent at checkpoints. I don't call attention to myself but always open everything in case I've been called out for additional screening, pointing out where cables and other points of interest for security people might be.

Do I think this is invasive. Yes. Do I think this is ineffective. Yes. Am I willing to risk my career and personal life style to defend these issues. Sadly no. Does the U.S. constitution cover the rest of the world. No.

I'll repeat this point. Develop your own personal strategy to deal with the shortcomings of today's world. Defend yourself with awareness and intelligence. When a situation becomes unreasonable, point it out, document it if you intend to follow up, and then move on with your own plan.

As I understand it, free movement (or travel) is a right, not a priviledge. Technology's ability to move us faster or further has not changed that.

I'd like to add that I have no intent to make FT my forum to discuss political or legal issues around which I have only my opinions and no expertise. It is only that this thread brought forward a few thoughts I'd had and thought I'd add to the conversation.