John Tyner is pretty awesome. Found this article in Google News yesterday morning and ended up reading every single one of his blog posts.
http://johnnyedge.blogspot.com/2010/11/these-events-took-place-roughly-between.html
When I read about these new machines a few months ago I thought fine, next time I fly I'll just opt for a patdown. Didn't know I would be signing myself up to be fondled. But everyone will be safe and secure from the hordes of terrorists lurking in every major airport's parking lot, waiting for the day that America drops their defenses enough so that they could board an airplane, the one place in the world where their evil plans can possibly be realized.
On the other hand, being a person who has recorded concerts with and without permission for the past 7 years I know pretty well that less intrusive patdowns are not effective. I've even had a few that were pretty invasive, and my (recording) equipment was touched but the security person did not seem to notice.
On the third hand, some people claim that the airport patdown is non-intrusive, as long as you aren't acting in a way to draw attention to yourself.
On the fourth hand, some kind of realistic body suit could get you through the invasive patdowns too, I imagine. Entering an airport in disguise just might be <a href="http://content.usatoday.com/communities/ondeadline/post/2010/11/young-asian-boards-flight-to-canada-in-eerily-lifelike-disguise-as-elderly-male/1">crazy enough to work.</a> Especially if the objective is just to hide something on your body rather than to give yourself a new face.
Thank you airport security, for making me feel less secure (against an unlikely threat) while simultaneously violating my privacy. Hypothetically, anyway -- I don't really fly very frequently at all.