In which Stock sings the praises those new security devices that take a picture of what lies under your clothing. In fact, he waxes positively enthusiastic:
You can choose this method to go through the security line or you can use the usual method of walking through the metal scanner and then being subject to the wand and a 'pat down'. Next, as graphic and revealing as the image of yourself is, it is only seen by an operator who is located in another room entirely and who will never see your face or know your name. After verification that there is nothing dangerous attached to your body the image is deleted forever.
I always got something dangerous attached to my body, Stock, like a miniature-Weapon O' Mass Destruction. How do I know pictures of it won't turn up on the Internet?
If the operator spots anything which looks suspicious on the image of your skin (drugs taped to the body, a thin strip of plastic explosives, small non-metallic items, etc.) she sends an electronic signal to the officer outside the room who is watching you stepping from the glass column.
She? She???
Oh, in case you're wondering if I have subjected myself to this new 'peek-a-boo' high tech equipment, the answer is 'yes'. After being scanned I got to go into the separate room where the operator reviews the images.
How long did it take her to stop laughing?
Is that the same Stockwell Day who writes about admiring men's bodies?
ReplyDeleteIt's best not to think about it. Or when Stockwell Day, in the AGE OF TERROR!! says this:
ReplyDeleteI can tell you the whole process felt less invasive than what happens presently when a security person asks you to undo your belt in front of everybody and then runs his hand along your waistline to make sure it's only your boxers under there.
Now the terrorists know just how to torture the Canadian Minister of Public Safety. Just let the hottest Al Qaeda feel him up.
It's an obvious civil liberties violation. I wouldn't go through that thing if a big bag of Leprechaun gold lay on the other side.
ReplyDelete