Are Muslims Exempt From Full Body Scanners?

This is a follow-up to my March 11th post, “Insanity! Full Body Scanners Exempt Muslims.”
Full Body Scanners (FBS) are also called Advanced Imaging Technology Screening. Our government’s Transportation Security Agency (TSA) claims that “This walk-through imaging technology efficiently detects metallic and non-metallic threats, including weapons, explosives and other items that a passenger is carrying on his/her person.”
The TSA also insists that it “has implemented strict measures to protect passenger privacy, which is ensured through the anonymity of the [FBS] image. The image cannot be stored, transmitted or printed, and is deleted immediately once viewed.” But the plain fact is that the scanners are quite intrusive of our privacy as you can see below:

My March 11th post, “Insanity! Full Body Scanners Exempt Muslims,” reproduced a substantial part of an article titled “Islam,” written by Susan Dale published on the reputable HumanEvents.com. In it, Dale claims that the Council on Islamic American Relations (CAIR) objects to the FBS and has threatened to sue the U.S. government if Muslims are subjected to the scanners. Dale claims that the Obama administration, specifically the TSA capitulated to CAIR’s demand and agreed that Muslim air passengers will be exempt from FBS and will be patted down instead.
Dale, however, gave no links to her source(s). So I e-mailed her (SusanDaleInvests@yahoo.com), asking for her sources. Was it an Executive Order signed by Obama? Was it a TSA memo?
Dale did not respond to my e-mail.
So I undertook some research on my own to verify Dale’s claims. This is what I found:

  • Muslims are enjoined against being screened by Full Body Scanners. Saying that the scanners violate Islamic law on modesty, Muslim-American groups, including CAIR, are supporting a “fatwa – a religious ruling – issued by the Fiqh (jurisprudence) Council of North America which forbids Muslims from going through the FBS. The fatwa states: “It is a violation of clear Islamic teachings that men or women be seen naked by other men and women. Islam highly emphasizes haya (modesty) and considers it part of faith. The Quran has commanded the believers, both men and women, to cover their private parts.”
  • In the UK, passengers who refuse FBS screening are barred from boarding the plane.
  • In the United States, however, the TSA makes Full Body Scanners optional for all passengers, Muslim or otherwise. On its website, the TSA says “Passengers who do not wish to utilize this screening will receive an equal level of screening, including a physical pat-down.”

To conclude, in any airport in America, anyone can refuse to be screened by Full Body Scanners. If you do, you’ll be patted down by an airport security agent. Thus, Susan Dale’s article in HumanEvents.com was misleading and quite deceptive in NOT informing readers that the TSA makes the scanners optional for all, not just Muslim passengers.
We don’t need to make up stuff against Obama and his agenda; we have plenty real reasons to oppose him. What Dale did is despicable and ill-serves patriots who are mindful of the real dangers that radical Islam means to America and western civilization. What Dale did also supplies the Left and their Islamist allies with the ammunition to use against us. What Dale did is stupid and wrong.
~Eowyn

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

9
Leave a Reply

avatar
4 Comment authors
DaveCSC5502Eowynbkeyser Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
Notify of
bkeyser
Guest
bkeyser

Well, not to jump to the author’s defense, but it is possible that the TSA site was updated after the Human Events article was written. The HE date was March 2, and the TSA site says: In March 2010, TSA began deploying 150 backscatter imaging technology units, which were purchased with American Recovery and Reinvestment Art (ARRA) funds. So I assume it’s possible the TSA made revisions to their site in March. There is also some question as to the TSA’s honesty regarding storing the images. https://edition.cnn.com/2010/TRAVEL/01/11/body.scanners/ This does not vindicate Ms. Dale by any means, but I have a… Read more »

CSC5502
Guest
CSC5502

Actually, nobody corrected the record on anything. Your opinion that Dale’s article was “misleading” is exactly that. You don’t know if the TSA simply amended policy because of the uproar. Maybe Dale didn’t believe your “credentials.” I can say I’m anything I want; how do you know if it’s true or not?
Also, ask yourself one question. If ANYBODY could refuse the scanner, and it was ALWAYS TSA’s policy, why did CAIR threaten to sue, and why the Fatwa? Nobody threatens to sue for something they can already have.

Dave
Editor

What needs to happen is that the American people need to grow a pair, rise up and demand these TSA goons start profiling passengers instead of stri- searching grandma and molesting 14 yo girls. Since Lockerbie, every single commercial airliner that has been brought down or threatened was done so by a camel-washing goon who had dark hair, a dark complexion, along with brown eyes, and half of them were named Mohammed. It’s time to stop screwing around with this stoopid PC bullsh*t, before more innocent people are killed. I refuse to fly commercially until they get their act together,… Read more »

Dave
Editor

Eowyn,
LOL – Yeah, I have been a little busy lately. This job search thingy is getting on my nerves.
Atlanta has been hit hard for some reason, as normally most recessions historically don’t affect us like this one.
No one around here is hiring right now.
-Dave