It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Extremely Invasive Body Scanners Being Installed At All Major U.S. Airports

page: 1
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 08:55 PM
link   
New (world order) scanners coming soon to an airport near you. I am utterly repulsed by this invasion of privacy.





Extremely Invasive Body Scanners Being Installed At All Major U.S. Airports

The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) has formally announced that it plans to install 150 extremely invasive body scanning machines for primary security screenings at airports across the United States. These extremely invasive scanners reveal strikingly graphic images of the exposed bodies of airline passengers, even including intimate medical details like colostomy bags or evidence of mastectomy.

In fact, the scanners are so accurate that some analysts claim that they produce better quality images of your exposed body than a magazine photograph would.

Keep in mind that these body scanners are going to be used as the "primary" security screening method at airports across the United States...

...We were considering putting up a photo of what these "body scans" look like, but we decided not to because these body scans actually do border on obscenity.

The reality is that these "body scans" are the closest thing you can get to viewing a person's exposed body without actually seeing their skin.

Security officials in Australia where they have installed similar body scanning machines confess that these machines DO show people's exposed bodies.

Cheryl Johnson, the general manager of the Office of Transport Security in Australia, freely confessed the following about these intrusive scanners: "It will show the private parts of people, but what we've decided is that we're not going to blur those out, because it severely limits the detection capabilities."


More at source:
futurestorm.blogspot.com...#




posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 09:17 PM
link   
Check out this link. It shows what the scans look like. It is almost like a strip search. WARNING=IT IS JUST SHORT OF BEING X-RATED. DO NOT CLICK ON THIS LINK IF THAT BOTHERS YOU

www.dailymail.co.uk...



posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 09:26 PM
link   
GRRR.

Total Recall.

We sort of knew these were coming, but yeah, that's some pretty detailed stuff.

Eventually, someone at TSA will get busted for uploaded his favorites to his Facebook or something.

I don't think I'll ever fly again. I'll have to constantly explain how I just got out of the pool and it was cold water.


I don't like it one bit, but like one of the comments on the source, I wonder how long it will be before all of the CCTVs have this capability. In a way it's really disturbing. The trend is to always make things cheaper and smaller. They're big now, but in two years, they'll probably be as big and unobtrusive as an Iphone.

I think if TSA uses these, they should be brought up on charges. Last time I checked, I wasn't allowed to videotape people naked without them consenting to it. I suppose the small print on your ticket says it's fine for them to ogle your junk all they want.

barf.



posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 09:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by KSPigpen

I think if TSA uses these, they should be brought up on charges. Last time I checked, I wasn't allowed to videotape people naked without them consenting to it. I suppose the small print on your ticket says it's fine for them to ogle your junk all they want.

barf.


I think a good class-action lawsuit is in order here.

With the recession, there must be zillions of unemployed or underemployed lawyers out there. I smell a goldmine for one or a few of them with this.



posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 09:37 PM
link   
reply to post by silent thunder
 


Oh yeah, I forgot. They're the government and they have little pieces of paper that say they can do whatever they want.



posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 09:40 PM
link   
reply to post by silent thunder
 


looks like you better get your lead lined underwear out.



posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 09:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by KSPigpen
reply to post by silent thunder
 


Oh yeah, I forgot. They're the government and they have little pieces of paper that say they can do whatever they want.




Does this fall under the category of "government"? I thought airlines were privately owned. Or is the security-side of things somehow government-owned?

When you go through customs moving between nations, I understand the government is involved. Is this also true of domestic flights?

Of course we all know the line between "government" and "business" is getting hazier by the day (*cough cough* BAILOUTS *cough cough* GOLDMAN SACHS *cough cough* HALBURTON and BECHTEL....)

This is a sad pass we've come to indeed.



posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 09:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by TiM3LoRd
reply to post by silent thunder
 


looks like you better get your lead lined underwear out.


Maybe I should convert to Mormonism. Don't they have some kind of special heavy-duty underwear they are supposed to use?



posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 09:47 PM
link   
Nothing short of Voyerism and Paedophilia, to say there doing this because of "Security Threats" is absolute bull, we spent 100 years of aviation without these scanners and did relatively well, what next? actually ordering every passenger to walk through Airport Terminals completely naked.



posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 09:51 PM
link   
reply to post by KSPigpen
 


Yes it does, but only in the name of National Security. All other ogling is strictly prohibited and a figment of your paranoid imagination.



I, instead of just complaining about this amongst ourselves, propose a solution. It will however require everyone of us willing to fight the machine to show up a little early for our flights, and to be willing to be disruptive.

Disruption of the flow is the only way to stop these machines. And the protests from us in the tinfoil hat bunch isn't going to be enough. We need regular businessmen and families who are traveling to piss and moan as well.

So I propose a list of options to disrupt the flow. If they have to constantly stop to hand search travelers, there will be a backup, and delays, and people will miss flights. I know it's not courteous, but neither is looking at my junk.

-get self adhesive plastic letters and write dirty messages to the TSA scanners on your body
-Wear aluminum foil undergarments (to protect against cell phone radiation of course)
-Wear sex toys (odd I know, but when the TSA screeners are ogling a young ladies body and sees something more and has her patted down, our case will be proven that more can be seen than should be)
-Get an elastic band, sew on pockets for non-metallic items such as granola bars, chapstick, q tips, tampons, etc(make it into a personal item kit, in case your baggage gets lost
) not my idea but a good one

this list is not complete, but is rather just a start of what can be done to slow the process and disrupt the system.

This will be the only way that they will reverse the implementation of these scanners, if the average joe gets pissed off by it and the sheep complain about the hassle and delays.



posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 10:15 PM
link   
I'm all for the scanners. I personally have nothing to hide in my pants and if it means that my flight is going to be more secure then I'm more than happy with it.

I am actually at a loss of words here.

This is one of those "Think of the children!!!" scenarios. Is a naked child image worth more than a hundred adult lives?

[edit on 4/10/2009 by nightrun]



posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 10:17 PM
link   
My poor wife had a terrible experience with airline security a few years ago, and this was before these awful scanners. She is (if you will excuse the boasting) a young and quite beautiful head-turner. As we were going through the "pat-down" experience, one of the airline secury guards (who was A WOMAN, by the way) said something like, "Oh, here comes a looker. We'd better give 'er to Jimmy." Then "Jimmy" took her aside and, to put it politely, "took his time" making sure she wasn't carrying anything more dangerous than a nail clipper on her legs. Even typing this now makes me furious. I wanted to kick his *** right then and there, but I had to settle for a glare, which was returned with a smirk. My wife was practically in tears after that.

Now just think, that's the kind of person who will be running the new cams.



posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 10:22 PM
link   
No one is forcing anyone to fly. There is no right to fly in the Constitution. From what I have read of the scanning methods, the person viewing the images isn't at the security checkpoints, but removed in a separate room, where they don't see the person being scanned, just the scanned images. Don't like it, don't fly, or submit to a strip search and full cavity search.



posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 10:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by digger2381
reply to post by KSPigpen
 


Yes it does, but only in the name of National Security. All other ogling is strictly prohibited and a figment of your paranoid imagination.



I, instead of just complaining about this amongst ourselves, propose a solution. It will however require everyone of us willing to fight the machine to show up a little early for our flights, and to be willing to be disruptive.

Disruption of the flow is the only way to stop these machines. And the protests from us in the tinfoil hat bunch isn't going to be enough. We need regular businessmen and families who are traveling to piss and moan as well.

So I propose a list of options to disrupt the flow. If they have to constantly stop to hand search travelers, there will be a backup, and delays, and people will miss flights. I know it's not courteous, but neither is looking at my junk.

-get self adhesive plastic letters and write dirty messages to the TSA scanners on your body
-Wear aluminum foil undergarments (to protect against cell phone radiation of course)
-Wear sex toys (odd I know, but when the TSA screeners are ogling a young ladies body and sees something more and has her patted down, our case will be proven that more can be seen than should be)
-Get an elastic band, sew on pockets for non-metallic items such as granola bars, chapstick, q tips, tampons, etc(make it into a personal item kit, in case your baggage gets lost
) not my idea but a good one

this list is not complete, but is rather just a start of what can be done to slow the process and disrupt the system.

This will be the only way that they will reverse the implementation of these scanners, if the average joe gets pissed off by it and the sheep complain about the hassle and delays.


That is actually very brilliant.
I especially like the tinfoil undergarments. Does anyone know if that would keep them from seeing my (cough) Henry?

I'm just a bit of a prude...but man the money to be made....



posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 10:23 PM
link   
reply to post by silent thunder
 


I don't buy it. Only females pat down females, unless 'Jimmy' was a female.



posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 10:26 PM
link   
Time to apply for a TSA job.

Might as well get a "lift" out of your job!!



posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 10:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by silent thunder
My poor wife had a terrible experience with airline security a few years ago, and this was before these awful scanners. She is (if you will excuse the boasting) a young and quite beautiful head-turner. As we were going through the "pat-down" experience, one of the airline secury guards (who was A WOMAN, by the way) said something like, "Oh, here comes a looker. We'd better give 'er to Jimmy." Then "Jimmy" took her aside and, to put it politely, "took his time" making sure she wasn't carrying anything more dangerous than a nail clipper on her legs. Even typing this now makes me furious. I wanted to kick his *** right then and there, but I had to settle for a glare, which was returned with a smirk. My wife was practically in tears after that.

Now just think, that's the kind of person who will be running the new cams.


OMG - that's makes me furious, your poor wife.

Question though: I though it was in the rule books that TSA (if they were going to physically touch a person) had to be of the same gender? Is this rule situational then, or is it not even an official rule?



posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 10:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by stevegmu
reply to post by silent thunder
 


I don't buy it. Only females pat down females, unless 'Jimmy' was a female.


I am not lying. This is the internet, so I can't prove anything, but I assure you it is the stone-cold truth.



posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 10:38 PM
link   



OMG - that's makes me furious, your poor wife.

Question though: I though it was in the rule books that TSA (if they were going to physically touch a person) had to be of the same gender? Is this rule situational then, or is it not even an official rule?


Don't know whether its in the rule books or not, but I assure you it happened. One of the most humiliating days of my (and her) life.



posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 10:39 PM
link   
reply to post by silent thunder
 


At what airport did this incident allegedly happen?



new topics

top topics



 
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join