North Coast Online

Turn Your Head And Cough, Please

The infamous back-scatter X-ray machine has returned.

- The Phoenix airport on Friday became the first in the United States to test new X-ray technology that can see through people's clothes and show the body's contours with blush-inducing clarity.

Critics have said the high-resolution images created by the "backscatter" technology are too invasive. But the Transportation Security Administration adjusted the equipment so the pictures can be blurred in certain areas while still detecting concealed weapons.

During the testing, the machine will be used only as a back-up screening measure. Passengers who fail the standard screening with a metal detector will be able to choose between the new device or a pat-down search.

"It's 100 percent voluntary, so if the passenger doesn't feel comfortable with it, the passenger doesn't have to go through it," TSA spokesman Nico Melendez said.

That's comforting, we have an option.  We can either let the entire staff look at our private parts (albeit blurred -- if you bellieve them) or -- if we're uncomfortable with that -- let 'em fondle them.  Seems rather a Hobson's choice to me. 

I'm rather fond of the old he's got an Islamic name, paid cash, has no luggage, bought a one-way ticket and is sweating bullets in the ticket line while smoke comes out his sneakers school of airline security.  But that's just me.

Blame Canada

I've been pretty supportive of the Bush administration's actions to protect us against terrorism.  It doesn't bother me particularly that satellites are monitoring phone conversations with suspected terrorists and I really don't give a damn if some Guantanamo prisoner picked up in Afghanistan doesn't have the right to obtain a writ of habeas corpus.  But I have reached one point of disagreement.

And so it pains me greatly to admit that I support Louise Slaughter's contention that they're screwing up the American-Canadian border big time.

. . . what the administration wants is to force Canada to adopt the American government's dim view of civil liberties by allowing travelers to be fingerprinted if they approach the bridge but then decide not to cross. Canadian law allows fingerprinting only upon arrest.

The issue behind this squabble is shared border management, a forward-looking plan that would allow Customs functions for both countries to be located on one side of the border - in this case, Fort Erie. The change would benefit Canada by putting more jobs over there, but it is especially useful to Buffalo.

Add to that the soon-to-be-implemented passport requirements (already in force for air and ship travelers) and a new and very burdensome paperwork requirement for freight carriers.  By it's actions the government's not only making it harder to cross the border, it's making it downright unprofitable.  And 200 years of friendly relations between the two countries have made border towns like Buffalo economically dependent on cross-border trade.

I noticed years ago as a young manager that I tended to ask more of my dependable employees.  I could count on them after all, and it was just easier to leave the laggards alone and be satisfied with their minimal attempts at working.  It wasn't fair to the good ones, of course.  But when you're pressed for time, you often tend to take the path of least resistance.

I suspect that's what the Bush administration is doing with its regulations on border-crossings with Canada.  I mean, the real problems are on the southern border -- it appears to be a giant, lawless and uncontrollable sieve.  Let's face it, Mexico's a mess. 

But we know we can count on Canada.  They've got the money, the computers and the trained and motivated security forces to make our whims work.  It's wrong of course.  Homeland Security should be concentrating more on Nuevo Laredo and Tijuana than Fort Erie and Lewiston, but the U.S. is taking the path of least resistance and this time I support the Democrats' efforts to change it.

Border ID's -- Bad Idea

It's looking more and more doubtful that a special ID to cross the border between America and Canada will be put in place by the original 2008 goal.

Internal administration correspondence is casting a shadow over the government's ability to meet deadlines for strict new ID requirements for Americans wishing to enter and leave Canada.

The papers also raise ominous new issues of government surveillance of ordinary citizens because of the high-tech radio implants the Bush administration plans to install into the $50 identity cards.

One document is a State Department letter to the Homeland Security Department suggesting technology won't be ready by the Bush administration's deadline of Jan. 1, 2008.

Good! The card would kill hundreds of millions, if not billions, of dollars of cross-border commerce.  It may seem a sensible and harmless idea from far-away Washington or even farther-away New York City; but it looks horrible from this town that looks 500 feet across the river to the other side in question. Security would be much better-served by rationalizing Canada's immigration and tourism with ours.

That stands to be accomplished now that a Conservative and America-friendly Prime Minister Harper leads the government.

As for the radio-chip thing.  If it's even true -- and it may be -- that's a non-starter.  The President's good and loyal friend Tony Blair has put into motion a national ID card for his nation which will probably attempt to incorporate some of the same technology.  The Brits have stoically accepted the prospect (wouldn't you know) but this is one case where we won't.

I'm happy that the NSA is listening in on selected calls between the US and terrorists abroad.  I'm nonplussed to find out that it may also be putting my phone call history into a database.  But I'll be damned if I'll sit by while it tracks my travel in real-time through a chip in my wallet.  In the end it's like gun-control -- law-abiding citizens would be tracked.

Criminals and terrorists would just avoid the whole mess and carry on as before.