Twelve 'trial' airports in the US are currently using the backscatter x-ray scanner for passengers. These include Baltimore/Washington, Dallas/Fort Worth, Jacksonville (FL), Phoenix, and San Francisco. Other airports where TSA is also considering using the backscatter machines are: Atlanta, Boston, Chicago O'Hare, Gulfport (MS), Kansas City, Las Vegas, Los Angeles, Miami, Minneapolis/St Paul, New York JFK, and Tampa.
NEW AIRPORT XRAY MACHINE AND PRIVACY
- Thread starter Gdmuscle
- Start date
Twelve 'trial' airports in the US are currently using the backscatter x-ray scanner for passengers. These include Baltimore/Washington, Dallas/Fort Worth, Jacksonville (FL), Phoenix, and San Francisco. Other airports where TSA is also considering using the backscatter machines are: Atlanta, Boston, Chicago O'Hare, Gulfport (MS), Kansas City, Las Vegas, Los Angeles, Miami, Minneapolis/St Paul, New York JFK, and Tampa.
By the way; just so we all understand just how much detail is revealed in one of these backscatter images, here is a j-peg showing the Rapiscan backscatter x-ray scanner and a sample image.
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2004
- Posts
- 5,842
- Media
- 0
- Likes
- 2,611
- Points
- 333
- Location
- Memphis (Tennessee, United States)
- Gender
- Male
Yes, you can bet your last dollar on that and when certain government authorities want to see the "nikid" bodies of a movie star or their next door neighbor, they will be able to access it. If we let them. the pictures will be on our dirver's licences or at least at the state driver's license center.
Meanwhile the local museum is shut down for displaying art works of nude people.
Those Renaissance artists are a real terrorist threat to our nation you know.
These articles shows what the x-ray scans are like.
http://www.dr.dk/p1/images/2004/03/bodysearch%5B1%5D.jpg
http://www.epic.org/privacy/faa/bodysearch.gif
http://www.sweetliberty.org/issues/privacy/xratedxray.htm
They are not photographic quality but clearly shows the body outline.............
http://www.dr.dk/p1/images/2004/03/bodysearch%5B1%5D.jpg
http://www.epic.org/privacy/faa/bodysearch.gif
http://www.sweetliberty.org/issues/privacy/xratedxray.htm
They are not photographic quality but clearly shows the body outline.............
titan1968
Loved Member
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2004
- Posts
- 876
- Media
- 5
- Likes
- 748
- Points
- 313
- Location
- Montreal (Quebec, Canada)
- Sexuality
- 50% Straight, 50% Gay
- Gender
- Male
All of this technology would never have been used just a few years ago; it would have been considered an invasion of privacy- we had rights they (governments) said.
Since the tragedy of 9-11, our governments, with the help of the private sector, seem to be looking for reasons to introduce such invasive technology in the name of security.
I do believe in the safety of the public, but at what cost? (e.g. higher airfares, higher household insurance premiums, higher stress levels, loss of privacy, loss of presumption of innocence).
It is not as bad in Canada, but our media love to remind us that we live in a dangerous world; we are conditioned to live in fear. How many people had alarm systems installed after 9-11?
This has to stop! Let us reach out to each other and put an end to this insanity!
:grouphug:
Yes, let us hug a terrorist and persuade them to change their core beliefs. I'm sure it will work. It always has.
I know I feel safer that my neighbor doesn't have any of those danger nail clippers in their pocket/purse. If I was a terrorist, nailclippers would probably be my tool of choice: they positively inspire fear with the damage they can do to the human body. But, not being able to smuggle them onboard, thanks to the vigilant eyes of the screeners, I'd probably just decide to do something else for Allah like blow up a kindergarten somewhere.
Remember: terrorist masterminds are easily foiled by the airport screening process. They would never think of bringing REAL weapons onboard via maintenance/food service/cleaning crews.
So, tell yourself that the invasive screening process of highly unlikely individuals is doing something to make you so much safer. To paraphrase a famous line, "if you feel safe, you ARE safe."
I know I feel safer that my neighbor doesn't have any of those danger nail clippers in their pocket/purse. If I was a terrorist, nailclippers would probably be my tool of choice: they positively inspire fear with the damage they can do to the human body. But, not being able to smuggle them onboard, thanks to the vigilant eyes of the screeners, I'd probably just decide to do something else for Allah like blow up a kindergarten somewhere.
Remember: terrorist masterminds are easily foiled by the airport screening process. They would never think of bringing REAL weapons onboard via maintenance/food service/cleaning crews.
So, tell yourself that the invasive screening process of highly unlikely individuals is doing something to make you so much safer. To paraphrase a famous line, "if you feel safe, you ARE safe."
Granny is now neutralized when she flies off to spoil the grandkids. But ANY terrorist knows, all you have to do is SHIP your stuff into the country. Cargo ships carrying containers, air cargo, mail, FedEx, UPS and a 100 other points of entry are STILL completely and totally open and not being screened.
The public feels "safer" because they don't encounter the "gaps" on a daily basis like they do when flying commercially. Charter a jet and you have unfettered access to the US.
Hell, any terrorist worth his salt would just walk across the border from Mexico, with the administrations defacto support.
Yeah, we're really fuckin' secure. IMHO, the reason we haven't been hit again is because they have chosen not too. Certainly not because we are capable of preventing it.
The public feels "safer" because they don't encounter the "gaps" on a daily basis like they do when flying commercially. Charter a jet and you have unfettered access to the US.
Hell, any terrorist worth his salt would just walk across the border from Mexico, with the administrations defacto support.
Yeah, we're really fuckin' secure. IMHO, the reason we haven't been hit again is because they have chosen not too. Certainly not because we are capable of preventing it.
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2004
- Posts
- 5,842
- Media
- 0
- Likes
- 2,611
- Points
- 333
- Location
- Memphis (Tennessee, United States)
- Gender
- Male
Kink, unfortunately you are right. But it has always been this way. All we can do is educate people to do right and then have consequences available that people don't want.
There is no such thing as 100 % preventing anything. If for some reason a person decided that I should be nurdered, there is a 50 chance that they will get a way with it. And if they have above average skills that percent may go to 100%. Oh they may catch them, but I will still be dead.
I will not live my life in fear. I go boldly into the world living the best I can be, and doing the best that I can do. If someone murders me, then maybe the government will catch them and justice will be served. I believe in an after life so there is no need for me to be afraid.
titan1968
Loved Member
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2004
- Posts
- 876
- Media
- 5
- Likes
- 748
- Points
- 313
- Location
- Montreal (Quebec, Canada)
- Sexuality
- 50% Straight, 50% Gay
- Gender
- Male
I tend to agree with what Freddie and KinkGuy have said. One cannot be 100 percent safe 100 percent of the time. I also choose not to live in fear.
Your country, the US, has spent billions of your tax dollars to fight terrorism at home and abroad with very little progress and disastrous consequences.
What ever happened to a person's right to live in suitable housing, to have access to health care services, to educate oneself, to drink clean water and live in a clean environment? Unfortunately, those rights are not universal, and this is the root of the problem of terrorism. Addressing those concerns would most definitely spell the end of the activities of most terrorist groups.
Peace man!
The inability of the FBI to get an integrated computer system that can be accessed by all agents is a disgrace and disasterous....attempts in the last century failed; and this failure contributed to some of the errors related to 9/11.
It is time for the government to get tough on those who contract to install and create such a system and FAIL to deliver. Cancelling a contract for hundreds of million of dollars with SAIC is not punishment for unacceptable performance. I would suggest that an appropriate action would be to inform the contractor that you have 18 months to make a workable system [no additional funds] or be barred from bidding on all federal contracts for 10 years. In the interim, you must petition the contracting officer for permission to bid; and on award, you must post a bond equal to the contract to insure that the contract is met. Something like this would certainly get corporate attention.
This may be partially a problem of not wanting to embarass/penalize a company whose executives have strong ties to the White House and the Congress. However, ineffective contract management and reluctance to penalize contractors is a continuing problem throughout our history.
OR perhaps, it is time to disband the dysfunctional FBI and create another system that might work.
jay
