"Naked" X-Ray Scans At The Airport.. Your Thoughts?

[shrubber]

perhaps as a safety/security measure the airline attendents could include a
safety lecture including directions for putting out flaming Muslim Terrorist underpants.

 

[clovergirl5]

perhaps as a safety/security measure the airline attendents could include a
safety lecture including directions for putting out flaming Muslim Terrorist underpants.

 

[Mickey's Minion]

My point is that this is NOT going to save anyone, just like restricting lotions and liquids for all passengers didn't stop this particular attempt.

All these people stating, "I don't care, I don't have anything to hide, they can do it to me, I don't care, I want to be safe" are perfect examples of social engineering at its best. These people believe that by giving up their (and everyone else's) right to privacy, they'll somehow get safety in return when, in reality, there is no such thing as absolute safety.

It saddens me that generations of men and women fought and died for our personal liberties in this country and here we are ready to throw those liberties away for a "warm fuzzy" fallacy of a so-called security blanket. If this current day country morphed back to 1765, I don't see too many of us even surviving, let alone actually having the courage and determination to fight (and die) for our freedoms.

For me, this isn't about believing the body scanners are going to make flying any safer.

Searches are going to be done. that has already been established. People acting suspiciously, people buying one way tickets, people randomly selected, it doesn't matter. Searches have been around for awhile and are not going to go away.

For me, this is all about a choice on how to get searched.

I MUCH prefer the anonymity of a machine that does not have my name attached in any way, so no identifying info. Just as if you were pulled for a pat down, the TSA agent does not ask for ID again. They just search you.

I MUCH prefer the technology where the machine takes very fuzzy, backscatter technology images which distorts the picture enough to make it look like a chalk drawing.

I MUCH prefer having pictures taken, ones that are not saved in any way, so would be next to impossible for the image to be distributed to a fatty online website. Even if it did make it to the fatty online website, you couldn't sue because even you would not know it was you. Unlike a medical x-ray where umpteen medical students have access too because they are filed away and have your name attached to the x-ray, this image stays exactly a couple of minutes in front of a second agent and then is automatically erased. I understand the technology, so therefore trust that we are not being mislead. Could there be a mistake and a machine delivered without the storage capacity disabled? Sure. But still, there is absolutely no way an image can be identified, unless you are wearing something like a metal necklace with your name and address on it.

I much prefer this over having somebody groping my privates and putting their hands all over me. To 'me' that is a far greater invasion of privacy.

As for my children, when they get searched, a parent is not allowed right with them. Usually you can observe, but you cannot get close. So, yes, I will always choose the scanner, where they are anonymous over having a TSA agent lead them away and touch them everywhere.

It is about having another choice for me, not about giving up my rights to privacy.

As of now, even with the airports that use the machines as primary, you can always opt out of the scan and ask for a pat down.

You have not given up your rights, you have been given an alternative choice.

For those of you so upset about the possibility of the scans leaking, I would suggest you become familiar with the technology behind it. That should ease your fears of a TSA Fatty website popping up.

 

[Mickey's Minion]

What if someone put your child on a website? Would you feel the same way?

Even if there was some major equipment glitch and a scan was able to be transmitted in order for it uploaded to a website, there still would be absolutely no way of identifying it as "my" child.

So, consequently, looking an a blurred, chalk drawing image of the outline of a child's body with absolutely no identifying information available, I would have no more qualms letting my child get scanned than letting them get a chest x-ray, knowing hundreds of medical students can view my child's chest xray rand it has far, far more potential to be uploaded to a website.

They really are just not interesting enough and not detailed enough, just like xrays, to warrant setting up a TSA Fatty or TSA Child website.

I allow my male children to swim competitively. Believe me, the outline that is visible to hundreds and open to photos by any of the crowd (but that is another thread) through the supertight jammers is not any different and probably more provocative than what could be seen on the TSA scan. If I allow my children to wear jammers, I must not have any issues with seeing outlines of bodies.

 

[chicagodisneyfan]

What if someone put your child on a website? Would you feel the same way?

Just fine! There are NO recognizable features to these pictures - how would anyone know it was my child - your child??

 

[Carly_Roach]

What if the chance was 100% that someday, somehow, somewheresomeone would be stopped from blowing up a plane through the use of this technology?

Sorry. Not buying it. The only way we can be 100% sure that somehow, somewhere, someone will be stopped in their action of blowing up a plane is by not flying any planes.

Period.

But how about this? Why don't we as a nation grow a spine, stop living in fear, behave like intelligent beings instead of dumb, panicky animals, stop giving up our rights for the illusion of safety, and take our chances with everyone else who decides to get on a plane, in a car, on a moving platform, etc?

This was a badly failed Mickey Mouse attempt to what? Blow a hole in the side of an airplane coming in from outside the country? Maybe take down a jet when it was making it's descent into a city that's already been horrifyingly decimated by the present economy?

C'mon people. Turn off Faux News, control the knee-jerk reaction and see this for what it is: a news story that couldn't even get any traction when it was happening live on Christmas day. I know. I was watching. The only major outlet carrying it was CNN. Faux News and MSNBC had reruns all afternoon and evening. But now that their followers are back from their holiday, the talking heads are making hay and selling ads by scaring the bejabbers out of the gullible masses willing to listen and regurgitate.

Here's a further thought as long as we're on the subject of terrorists: I doubt any major terrorist organization who's serious about causing terror in America is going to do the whole plane thing again. Why? Because it's been done. If anything, they're going to go after stuff we're not watching like our water supply, food supply, nuclear power plants, chemical plants or electrical grid.

But I guess that kind of speculation doesn't make money for the media right now.

 

[LisaR]

Sorry. Not buying it. The only way we can be 100% sure that somehow, somewhere, someone will be stopped in their action of blowing up a plane is by not flying any planes.

Period.

But how about this? Why don't we as a nation grow a spine, stop living in fear, behave like intelligent beings instead of dumb, panicky animals, stop giving up our rights for the illusion of safety, and take our chances with everyone else who decides to get on a plane, in a car, on a moving platform, etc?

This was a badly failed Mickey Mouse attempt to what? Blow a hole in the side of an airplane coming in from outside the country? Maybe take down a jet when it was making it's descent into a city that's already been horrifyingly decimated by the present economy?

C'mon people. Turn off Faux News, control the knee-jerk reaction and see this for what it is: a news story that couldn't even get any traction when it was happening live on Christmas day. I know. I was watching. The only major outlet carrying it was CNN. Faux News and MSNBC had reruns all afternoon and evening. But now that their followers are back from their holiday, the talking heads are making hay and selling ads by scaring the bejabbers out of the gullible masses willing to listen and regurgitate.

Here's a further thought as long as we're on the subject of terrorists: I doubt any major terrorist organization who's serious about causing terror in America is going to do the whole plane thing again. Why? Because it's been done. If anything, they're going to go after stuff we're not watching like our water supply, food supply, nuclear power plants, chemical plants or electrical grid.

But I guess that kind of speculation doesn't make money for the media right now.

So your answer is to have nothing, zilch, zero, nadda in place at airports and we just trust our fellow man?

I do agree with you that terrorists will go after our water supply and other things at some point but they haven't given up on airplanes entirely. And what should we do about our power plants and water supply? Leave them wide open and accessible because we should continue to trust our fellow man?

FWIW, I wouldn't watch Fox, CNN or MSNBC if you paid me. Why do you assume that because some people want effective procedures in place to make our planes and country safer, we must all be from the "dark side?"

 

[declansdad]

it's already such a hassle to fly now as it is, and i don't think having someone able to see a naked photo of me makes me feel more comfortable traveling. if anything it makes me more uncomfortable, what if those somehow get leaked or something??

saying these photos are naked photos of a person is a stretch.

My thoughts exactly. This recent experience was of a man flying in from two different countries. Scanning Americans daily on domestic flights would not have stopped this young man from doing what he did. Heck, even limiting liquids to the everyday flying American public couldn't have possibly stopped this young man.

He came in from Denmark, people. Not America.
IMO it doesn't matter if the scans are fuzzy or crystal clear, they're invasive and I can see great potential for misuse of those images. One example: instead of finding yourself on The People of Walmart website, you may someday see yourself on "The Fatties of America" website. And once those images are on the web, there's no taking them back. Sue all you want, have the website take them down. But it won't matter: once it's on the web, it's viral. And it's there for the rest of your natural-born life.

These scans will do absolutely nothing to make us safer. If a terrorist is hell-bent on bringing down a plane, then they will find a way. Giving up my liberty and privacy every day isn't going to stop that and it opens a whole new door on what others can do what I've blindly chosen to give up.

There is no way for the images to leave the scanner as they are not stored. This does nothing to intrude on your privacy. If you feel it does, you can always drive.

 

[DawnCt1]

It depends on your definition of 'incident'. Some would answer '2006'. Workers and passengers at LAX would quickly respond '2002'. Who knows how many attempts are made that go virtually unknown?

Still, the comparison to El Al isn't apt because they utilize additional procedures that would never be politically palatable in the US.

Maybe its time to recognize that political correctness may be killing us.

 

[Mickey's Minion]

Sorry. Not buying it. The only way we can be 100% sure that somehow, somewhere, someone will be stopped in their action of blowing up a plane is by not flying any planes.

Period.

But how about this? Why don't we as a nation grow a spine, stop living in fear, behave like intelligent beings instead of dumb, panicky animals, stop giving up our rights for the illusion of safety, and take our chances with everyone else who decides to get on a plane, in a car, on a moving platform, etc?

This was a badly failed Mickey Mouse attempt to what? Blow a hole in the side of an airplane coming in from outside the country? Maybe take down a jet when it was making it's descent into a city that's already been horrifyingly decimated by the present economy?

C'mon people. Turn off Faux News, control the knee-jerk reaction and see this for what it is: a news story that couldn't even get any traction when it was happening live on Christmas day. I know. I was watching. The only major outlet carrying it was CNN. Faux News and MSNBC had reruns all afternoon and evening. But now that their followers are back from their holiday, the talking heads are making hay and selling ads by scaring the bejabbers out of the gullible masses willing to listen and regurgitate.

Here's a further thought as long as we're on the subject of terrorists: I doubt any major terrorist organization who's serious about causing terror in America is going to do the whole plane thing again. Why? Because it's been done. If anything, they're going to go after stuff we're not watching like our water supply, food supply, nuclear power plants, chemical plants or electrical grid.

But I guess that kind of speculation doesn't make money for the media right now.

First of all, sorry you feel that any kind of attempt to kill hundreds of people, no matter how poorly planned, is to be laughed at as a "Mickey Mouse" event. And I think the people of the "decimated" city might disagree with your scoffing at

Maybe take down a jet when it was making it's descent into a city that's already been horrifyingly decimated by the present economy?

I don't think the economic status of the city in question makes it any more or less of a "Mickey Mouse" attempt.

Secondly, the scanners have been in use at over 20 major airports and numerous jails and federal court houses since 2007, long before the "Mickey Mouse" attempt.

This "Mickey Mouse" attempt did not prompt the overnight use of the body scanners.

And while I am not out buying plastic sheeting and duct tape and nor do I condone the scare tactics used by some of the media, in a way it has been helpful. One of the reasons this "Mickey Mouse" attempt was thwarted was due to the aggressive actions of the fellow passengers. If those passengers had not been watching Faux News, as you describe it, they may not have been spurred quite as quickly to act to protect their fellow passengers.

And since they acted so quickly, taking on a suspected bomber, I think that negates your premise that the people in today's world don't have the guts to fight.

 

[jazzielady]

Sorry. Not buying it. The only way we can be 100% sure that somehow, somewhere, someone will be stopped in their action of blowing up a plane is by not flying any planes.

Period.

But how about this? Why don't we as a nation grow a spine, stop living in fear, behave like intelligent beings instead of dumb, panicky animals, stop giving up our rights for the illusion of safety, and take our chances with everyone else who decides to get on a plane, in a car, on a moving platform, etc?

This was a badly failed Mickey Mouse attempt to what? Blow a hole in the side of an airplane coming in from outside the country? Maybe take down a jet when it was making it's descent into a city that's already been horrifyingly decimated by the present economy?

C'mon people. Turn off Faux News, control the knee-jerk reaction and see this for what it is: a news story that couldn't even get any traction when it was happening live on Christmas day. I know. I was watching. The only major outlet carrying it was CNN. Faux News and MSNBC had reruns all afternoon and evening. But now that their followers are back from their holiday, the talking heads are making hay and selling ads by scaring the bejabbers out of the gullible masses willing to listen and regurgitate.

Here's a further thought as long as we're on the subject of terrorists: I doubt any major terrorist organization who's serious about causing terror in America is going to do the whole plane thing again. Why? Because it's been done. If anything, they're going to go after stuff we're not watching like our water supply, food supply, nuclear power plants, chemical plants or electrical grid.

But I guess that kind of speculation doesn't make money for the media right now.

MTE! Thank you Carly for expressing these ideas far more eloquently than I could have. These scanners have been in use since at least 2000, when I took a group of students to Europe, they were in use at Newark airport. No, we weren't subjected to it, but I remember reading about it. And the original scan was FAR more detailed than the ones they're talking about now.

Folks, don't get your tinsel in a tangle over this. This country needs to pay far more attention to security on trains, busses, subways, etc.

We were in DC the summer they raised the terror alert for DC, NYC and Jersey, I think the summer of '04. I expected to see security all over the place, uzi's and maching guns on top of buildings, pat downs on the metro, tanks guarding important streets. Instead, we saw nothing, nada, zilch. Seriously, as much as I disliked bush 43, I didn't want anything to happen to him or our nation's capital.

I mean geez, there are so many ways they can hit us, and naked scanners in airports won't do diddly-squat.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

This was a badly failed Mickey Mouse attempt to what? Blow a hole in the side of an airplane coming in from outside the country? Maybe take down a jet when it was making it's descent into a city that's already been horrifyingly decimated by the present economy?

I find it odd that you don't realize the danger of an explosive on an airplane. While the guy was an idiot who couldn't get it to work right, those people were endangered by his actions.

While it is great that there are sully's in the world who can land disabled planes b/c the conditions and their experience are just right....or flights like the Hawaii flight--that started with a small breech in the cabin that grew into making part of the plane a convertable...or the Iowa crash where miraculously lots more people survived when expected when a pilot flew his plane long enough in circles to get to the one airport that happened to be practicing an emergency procedure to help them....a flight pattern that was not able to be replicated by any pilot in simulation....

The plane is still in danger of crashing.

Securing planes isn't about protecting cities with crappy economies from plane missiles. It's about preventing the deaths of those on board.

This event was only "mickey mouse" b/c the idiot failed. However, he had the tools and means to cause a real problem. Unfortunately, the goober couldn't follow the instructions in his terrorist bomb manual to get it right.

I'm glad you feel it is such a minor event.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

Folks, don't get your tinsel in a tangle over this. This country needs to pay far more attention to security on trains, busses, subways, etc.

I find it funny that you suggest not getting your tinsel in a tangel when there are folks fussing over the outline of their body like they are being subject to a Playgirl/playboy centerfold shoot.

I'm all for stronger security everywhere to protect everyone. But it is funny that it means we have to do it at the expense of planes falling from the sky--that have the capability to cause more damange, injury, and death than the amtrak auto-train. Given that it is a completely separate entity...it's like telling Dillard's to not worry about security cameras b/c it would be better if Best buy invested the money instead.

 

[FireDancer]

Maybe its time to recognize that political correctness may be killing us.

 

[AndyLL]

What a joke.

Heightened security checks did not stop the shoe bomber attemp.

x-raying shoes did not stop the london liquid attempt.

Limiting liquids to 3 Oz did not stop this attempt.

The materials he used could still be carried on with the body scan.

Power and less then 3 oz of liquid. Easy to get on.

Already just in about every test the human element failed and the testers were able to pass through the x-ray machines all types of banned items with no problems.

The body scan will be no different.

Just like the Disney security bag check... these 'heightened' and 'advanced' new security measures since 9/11 are just feel good measures designed to pacify the sheep into thinking they are safer.

Based on posts in this thread it works.

9/11, the shoe bomber, this attempt... all could have been easily prevented if our intellegence orgainizations did their job. Major red flags on all of them.

 

[Mickey's Minion]

What a joke.

Heightened security checks did not stop the shoe bomber attemp.

x-raying shoes did not stop the london liquid attempt.

Limiting liquids to 3 Oz did not stop this attempt.

The materials he used could still be carried on with the body scan.

Power and less then 3 oz of liquid. Easy to get on.

Already just in about every test the human element failed and the testers were able to pass through the x-ray machines all types of banned items with no problems.

The body scan will be no different.

Just like the Disney security bag check... these 'heightened' and 'advanced' new security measures since 9/11 are just feel good measures designed to pacify the sheep into thinking they are safer.

Based on posts in this thread it works.

9/11, the shoe bomber, this attempt... all could have been easily prevented if our intellegence orgainizations did their job. Major red flags on all of them.

A few got through no denying that.

How many were stopped because of these procedures? Just like in every aspect of the media, one only hears about the failures as that causes media sensation, thus profits. The successes are too mundane to report about.

Nothing any country does is going to be 100% infallible. And while I am the first one to uphold personal rights, and have been very concerned over the past 8 years of what has happened to our rights, I don't think the body scanners fall into the area of eroding our rights.

Personally, I think the TSA agency is in cahoots with Spencers.

Coming soon to your Spencers; Nekkid Body Scans.

 

[sbell111]

Sorry. Not buying it. The only way we can be 100% sure that somehow, somewhere, someone will be stopped in their action of blowing up a plane is by not flying any planes.

Period.

Really???

It seems that all it would take is for some dude's explosive tighty whiteys to show up on one of these x-ray scans.

But how about this? Why don't we as a nation grow a spine, stop living in fear, behave like intelligent beings instead of dumb, panicky animals, stop giving up our rights for the illusion of safety, and take our chances with everyone else who decides to get on a plane, in a car, on a moving platform, etc?

The simple answer to your question is 'because people are actively trying to kill us.' Caertainly, you don't believe that ignoring the threat will somehow keep us safe?

This was a badly failed Mickey Mouse attempt to what? Blow a hole in the side of an airplane coming in from outside the country? Maybe take down a jet when it was making it's descent into a city that's already been horrifyingly decimated by the present economy?

You say that like destroying an A330 full of people is no big deal.

C'mon people. Turn off Faux News, control the knee-jerk reaction and see this for what it is: a news story that couldn't even get any traction when it was happening live on Christmas day. I know. I was watching. The only major outlet carrying it was CNN. Faux News and MSNBC had reruns all afternoon and evening.

I'm failing to see your point. Is it that Fox and MSNBC was scooped by CNN?

Here's a further thought as long as we're on the subject of terrorists: I doubt any major terrorist organization who's serious about causing terror in America is going to do the whole plane thing again. Why? Because it's been done. If anything, they're going to go after stuff we're not watching like our water supply, food supply, nuclear power plants, chemical plants or electrical grid.

Ummm, this attempt was made by Al-Qaeda. Aren't they still a "major terrorist organization"??? Also, does it matter whether the guys trying to blow up our airplanes are in the big leagues, or should we protect ourselves against the minor league teams, also?

 

[eliza61]

What a joke.



Already just in about every test the human element failed and the testers were able to pass through the x-ray machines all types of banned items with no problems.

The body scan will be no different.

Just like the Disney security bag check... these 'heightened' and 'advanced' new security measures since 9/11 are just feel good measures designed to pacify the sheep into thinking they are safer.

Based on posts in this thread it works.

9/11, the shoe bomber, this attempt... all could have been easily prevented if our intellegence orgainizations did their job. Major red flags on all of them.

Well since the intelligence did not do it's job correctly, wouldn't it have been nice it the technology had been in place to provide a back up layer?

See us sheep don't feel it has to be an "either or" proposition. It's actually possible to have bothe the technology and the intelligence agency in place.

Sheep really do come up with good ideas now and again.

 

[DawnCt1]

Apparently these explosives were sewn into the crotch of his underwear. 80 grams is not a lot of material but more than enough to bring down a plane. "Success" was thwarted because the plastic syringe melted. A glass syringe may have made the difference. Considering where the material was, I wonder if the full body scan would have seen 80 grams of explosives. We need a multifaceted approach that includes detection with dogs, etc. We also need to focus on finding the bomber, not just the bomb. Profiling behavior and likely suspects should be part of the security in every airport. It isn't.

 

[DawnCt1]

What a joke.

Just like the Disney security bag check... these 'heightened' and 'advanced' new security measures since 9/11 are just feel good measures designed to pacify the sheep into thinking they are safer.

Based on posts in this thread it works.

9/11, the shoe bomber, this attempt... all could have been easily prevented if our intellegence orgainizations did their job. Major red flags on all of them.

I don't think you can do compare the "feel good" silly check that WDW does, compared to actual screening. Sometimes I think that Disney is just looking for a smuggled lunch.

It is interesting that you say that our intelligence organizations didn't do their job. It seems to me that the STATE Dept. didn't do their job. The US embassy was notified by the guy's father. That information should have gone to STATE. What happened? Perhaps the same thing that happened with the Ft. Hood shooter. We can scrutinize a certain demographic. It wouldn't be nice. Furthermore, I am hearing that he may not have had a passport and was assisted in flying to the US without one. What is up with that? When our special ops and CIA agents do do their jobs, they get to stand trial. Note the 3 Navy Seals on trial now. In the meantime, this guy won't be interrogated. His defense lawyer will limit that.