Correct. And as a NEXUS member, it is pretty easy for me. I'll only fly there if I have a manifest need.

My thoughts exactly, except replace "Ari" with "yyzvoyageur" and replace "Canada" with "US".

As long as they allow for the option of a "pat-down" -- even the "3-5" minute version as some sort of penalty for not submitting to a strip search by the machine -- I will still fly and tolerate the "pat-down". I will try to take my jolly time with the "pat-down" and see no problem if the screeners want to make it last as long as I think I can afford to have it last while still making my flights.

This version of civil disobedience is going to be able to make this "option" unsustainable, and governmental mandating of a strip search in order to use public carriers/public facilities ought to invite some court challenges sooner than later.

What if, Heaven forfend, you get sick?

Good for you. ^

Um, I'll see my doctor. :confused:

Updated story.

Combine this with information about security upgrades to YVR for the Olympics and it's good times all around.

We're now getting behavior detection too! Better not look nervous while at the airport! Or you could get dumped.

What an embarrassment, but I expect nothing more from the Conservative toadies currently in power (they'd have had us in Iraq as well).

The proper response from a Canadian Prime Minister to the POTUS in the face of these TSA demands would have been: "I see Mr President. Well, I've also had some disturbing intelligence about threats to the pipelines carrying our oil into your country. We'll be shutting those down until the threat eases".

You all shout about ...Nude-o-scopes? ...Optional? ...And now they want us to strip for them? ...Voyeur? ...Strip search?

Your vivid imaginations have really run away with you!

Oh c'mon, Canada! You walk through the scanner, and it's done. Would you rather be groped by a stranger? (And with the physical location of the illegal stuff carried by the Christmas Day troublemaker, I really don't want that type of groping!)

Grow up... yes, you can choose the option to have a "hands on" physical search, if that's what you personally prefer. But don't complain about the body scanners. They do a better job, with a lot less personal impact on each person.

I would suggest doing some more research on the WBI devices. You can search here for the infamous Tampon Paradox - WBI devices cannot see inside of body cavities or under flesh folds (whether due to obesity or breast tissue), leaving plenty of spaces to hide enough explosives material to bring down an airliner. WBI is not the panacea that TSA/CATSA and other agencies would have you believe.

However, if you are comfortable with being strip-searched prior to flying, that is your choice. We do, however, have a right to complain when we see heavy-handed examples of wasteful government in the name of security theater, regardless of the government in question.

strip-search (strĭp'sûrch')
tr.v. strip-searched, strip-search·ing, strip-search·es
To search (a person) for illegal articles, such as drugs or weapons, by first requiring the removal of all clothing.

The body-scanner is not a strip-search... you're adding drama to the situation.

Yes! you have the right to complain... and yes! you have the right to choose a hands-on search. But to dramatize the body-scanner by calling it a strip-search... is just childish.

What do the images look like to you? I submit that removing clothing electronically is no different from removing them physically, just more expedient.

I'm more interested in how alarms will be cleared with this technology. I haven't seen a description of how they are cleared today. Do they just assume that feminine products are just that? I submit that if they do today a plane will go blooie tomorrow and we'll all be sorry. The aircraft gate should not be the primary point of interdiction for <channeling George Bush> "evil-doers".

We will lose more aircraft and the fault will lie with those allocating resources inappropriately. i.e. body scanners, out of fear.

Ah - if at first, you don't succeed, resort to definition and name calling attacks.

Nice, I am glad to know you can use your resources and look up a dictionary definition. I will stipulate one thing - the WBI is not a PHYSICAL strip search. IOW, it is not requiring one to remove one's clothing directly.

However, it is a virtual strip search. The devices in question, using various forms of waveform manipulation, remove one's clothes from view, leaving an image of one's self that appears naked. In various postings, here and other sources, you can find that the images are detailed enough to show:

• One's anal cleft
• The location of the umbilicus and definition of abdominal muscle tissue
• Whether a man is circumcised or not, and to which side he "dresses"

That is not dramatization, that is looking at released pictures from TSA, CNN and other sources. Whether virtually or physically, removal of one's clothing to determine presence of WEI is a strip search.

I'm not a practiced debater... as I said before, you have the right to choose a hands-on search.
Your dramatizing the situation by adding colourful self-designed descriptive words... is your opinion only. Contrary to where your head is at, the challenge of identifying the circumcised and non-circumcised will get dead-boring after the first five minutes. They all look the same. *chuckle*
To follow your line of thinking, makes us wonder about how titillated a medical professional may get when we go for our annual physical? Or... trying on a bathing suit before purchase... are we phobic about hidden cameras? Have you ever visited a spa? Spoken to a mother about privacy during childbirth?
Get with the times. Security is striving to do its best. The choice... is yours.