Steve wrote:
But, why would you want to object if you have nothing to hide?

Not everybody likes to show themselves naked to strangers.

On Fri, 13 Jan 2006 23:24:15 GMT, "Just Wondering" Best place 2 put
it @stinkingfinger.com wrote in
, seen in uk.railway:
"Ross" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 13 Jan 2006 23:13:29 GMT, "Just Wondering" Best place 2 put
it @stinkingfinger.com wrote:
"Ross" wrote...
On Fri, 13 Jan 2006 22:14:40 -0000, Steve wrote:
"Joe Patrick" wrote...

I read in the media earlier in the week, that trials of a scanner
system, similar to the system used in scairports started this week,
with people randomly selected to be scanned.
If I happen to be the "unlucky" one, can I request that I am not
scanned, or can they deny me the right to travel?

But, why would you want to object if you have nothing to hide?

I'd object on principle.
The principle being that I want to see real security improvements on
the railway I work on, rather than highly visible "playing at
security" games. [1]

The Paddington scanner is an example of Being Seen To Do Something
whilst not actually doing anything worth speaking of, and I want
nothing to do with that sort of official stupidity.
[...]
How typical Ross , typical U.K attitude to pretty much
everything......IMHO, from a fellow U.K citizen

So what "typical UK attitude" is that, then?

I'm not really sure which bit of my post you're referring to, given
that you've quoted all of it rather than simply the bit you're
commenting on.

If they had done nothing , you would complain , know they have done
something you complain , how typical.

OK. I take it from that comment that you are not responding to the
points made in either of the footnotes you quoted (and you're
definitely not commenting on my .sig, despite twice failing to delete
it), nor are you responding to my statement that I wish to see real
security improvements.

In point of fact, as someone who works on the railway and as I made
clear in my original post, I'm rather more interested in practical
security being put in place. Y'know, the sort of security which
actually *makes a difference*. Random scanning of willing volunteers
is most definitely not that sort of security.


I guesss you'll be the poor fellow the police will be dragging away and
scaring members of the public , due to your unwillness to cooperate and help
make the station a safer place , Ross the Rebel.

'S'OK, if they drag me away they'll just have to deal with a lot of
unhappy people demanding to know why they've taken the driver off
their train. And an unhappy train company. And an extremely unhappy
network operator. Oh, and given that we're talking a major London
station, they'll also quickly be dealing with a large media presence
who won't be slow to tell the world how stupid the "security services"
are being.

Meanwhile, I'll still be being paid.


Your a real Man., in fact your the sort of man that complains about his tax
bills , but would be willing to waster tax payers money by not just doing
your bit .Tut Tut.

Ah, abuse. The last resort of someone who knows he has no real
argument.

Never mind, someone will take you seriously. It's just not going to be
me. In the meantime, you will find your bridge off thataway ---

HTH, HAND.
--
Ross, in Lincoln, being cynical or sarcastic, as ever.
Reply-to will bounce. Replace the junk-trap with my name to e-mail me.

Demonstration of poor photography at http://ross.photobook.org.uk
AD: http://www.merciacharters.co.uk for European charters gripped by me

On Fri, 13 Jan 2006 23:21:57 GMT, D.S.B. wrote in
, seen in uk.railway,
quoting me:

The Paddington scanner is an example of Being Seen To Do Something
whilst not actually doing anything worth speaking of, and I want
nothing to do with that sort of official stupidity.

Sure is... Access to the same platforms via the bridge area was entirely
un-monitored- not even a 'security ' bod showing a presence, but seven BTP
+dog standing around near the 'scanner'.

Quite.

I'd rather those 7 BTP officers were deployed elsewhere on the system
where their presence would be of greater value.


[...]
Lets face it , if every entrance had one of those thingies and it became
obligatory to pass thru, then if a terrorist really want access , he would
catch a train at Acton Mailnline or somewhere- or an underground
station....that's without even considering the merits of whether terrorists
see this as a potential target.

I think that, having attacked air in the US and subway, mainline rail
and bus here, the next attack (God forfend there be one, but I suspect
there will be sooner or later) will be on an entirely unrelated
target. Somewhere crowded, perhaps, for maximum effect, but there are
plenty of crowded places which are no transport-related.

ISTR terrorist attacks in Israel on discos, cafés and shops; if they
can do it there, they can carry out such attacks much more easily
here.
--
Ross, in Lincoln, being cynical or sarcastic, as ever.
Reply-to will bounce. Replace the junk-trap with my name to e-mail me.

Demonstration of poor photography at http://ross.photobook.org.uk
AD: http://www.merciacharters.co.uk for European charters gripped by me

"Steve" wrote in message
...
But, why would you want to object if you have nothing to hide?

If you think that gimmicks and a waste of money like that is going to make
you safer, then you need to be fleeced of even more money, to pay the clever
people fleecing you.

"Just Wondering" Best place 2 put it @stinkingfinger.com wrote in message
...
If they had done nothing , you would complain , know they have done
something you complain , how typical.

I guesss you'll be the poor fellow the police will be dragging away and
scaring members of the public , due to your unwillness to cooperate and
help
make the station a safer place , Ross the Rebel.

Your a real Man., in fact your the sort of man that complains about his
tax
bills , but would be willing to waster tax payers money by not just doing
your bit .Tut Tut.

Er, how far did you get in your schooling? Let's just say you failed the
test and need to re-write your exams.

"Marc Brett" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 13 Jan 2006 22:14:40 -0000, "Steve" wrote:

But, why would you want to object if you have nothing to hide?

Sorry, but I don't particularly want a stranger operating a machine which
can
image the nipples and genitals of my 14 year old son or daughter.

Well, if the machines are THAT good perhaps I should go as the NHS have me
down as a very low priority on there list.

KW

Just Wondering wrote:

If they had done nothing , you would complain , know they have done
something you complain , how typical.

Well sensible people would demand that 'they' did something effective and
useful and complain if they didn't.

I guesss you'll be the poor fellow the police will be dragging away
and scaring members of the public , due to your unwillness to
cooperate and help make the station a safer place , Ross the Rebel.

Your a real Man., in fact your the sort of man that complains about
his tax bills , but would be willing to waster tax payers money by
not just doing your bit .Tut Tut.

Ho hum. Another brainless turd to killfile.

In uk.legal Joe Patrick wrote:
Steve wrote:
But, why would you want to object if you have nothing to hide?

I'm not usually the person to say things about things like this. I'm all
for ID cards and the like, but the fact remains that train travel should
always remain an "open" thing, not to mention the embarassment of being
the one chosen amongst a group of friends.

It does not in America where the Amtrak website specifically mentions that
ID is required for most of their trains. I can imagine the same thing
happening in the UK... I notice at Birmingham New Street that a small
army of people are now employed to check tickets at the exits/entrances
although they only glance at them without any detailed investigation.

Axel

On Fri, 13 Jan 2006 23:13:29 +0000, Just Wondering wrote:
"Ross" wrote in message
...
[1] The money being wasted on the Paddington scheme could usefully pay
for a number of BT Police officers for Cornwall [2], where ISTR there
is only 1 (yes, one) officer allocated full-time. That would be a
*real* improvement, IMO.
[2] I don't work in Cornwall, so I'm not demanding benefits for "my"
part of the railway at the expense of other areas.

How typical Ross , typical U.K attitude to pretty much
everything......IMHO, from a fellow U.K citizen

I wish! If more people were like Ross we'd have a chance!

wrote in message
.. .
"Steve" wrote in message
...
But, why would you want to object if you have nothing to hide?

If you think that gimmicks and a waste of money like that is going to make
you safer, then you need to be fleeced of even more money, to pay the
clever
people fleecing you.

These scanners are a complete waste of time and money!
What are they trying to achieve?
Prevent bombers getting to the airport? Ah ... No - lots of other ways of
getting there.

Prevent bombers getting on planes Ah ... No - see above plus airport
security measures.

Prevent a train from being blown up? Ah .... No - see assorted movies
displaying the talents of the French resistance in WW2 blowing up &
derailing trains; or read a good book on the subject. Doing it this way also
allows the bomber to live and perform the task again.

Show the population we take terrorism seriously and will try everything the
press think of to prove it? Ah .... Yes! Governments of all persuasions are
good at this sort of thing! It diverts attention from the real business of
anti-terrorism which is intelligence gathering and analysis; acting on the
results, possibly in ways the Government of the day wouldn't want us to know
about.

Roger C
PS Identity cards won't help in the war against terrorism either. Your good
terrorist will either forge a good one or ignore them. The really clever
terrorists at the top of the tree will be the first to get an ID card of
course. They will behave impeccably on the surface whilst co-ordinating the
efforts of the cannon fodder below them.