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.

 

Do you honestly not think this is a nude image?

page: 21
56
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 12:14 PM
link   
How about the LAX TSA agent running about the airport yelling, "I am god, I'm in charge."

www.nbclosangeles.com...

Now they have Moble Naked Body Scanners to examine your children at school or even walking down the street...why not!

www.prisonplanet.com...

All the pro "Peace and Safety" (anti Freedom) fans have a lot to look forward to.

.........
..........




posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 12:18 PM
link   
I wonder what Islamic folks feel about the airport scanners-What with them often wishing to cover up their women from mens eyes,I imagine they are not going to like the idea of airport staff studying the naked images of their wives.

Could that be part of the thinking behind the scanners-To further annoy the Muslims?



posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 12:19 PM
link   
These units will be abused I can guarantee that 100%. There will be individuals that operate these machines that will single out certain people. Not because they think that are a risk but because they want to get their jollies. I foresee a lawsuit by someone when a bunch of these turn up on the Internet. The image is simply inverted the only thing you have to do is invert it again and you have a naked picture of someone. The qualities of the scans are a lot better than what we have been shown as well.

I consider this an invasion of privacy and civil liberties.
I am sure they could come up with a different solution than this.



posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 12:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by LibertyLover
I'm not thrilled about my less than perfect and svelt body being displayed in all its, um, "glory", but could probably manage to deal if I wanted or needed to fly someplace badly enough. What concerns me is that currently it takes about 2 minutes to do one of these scans. I don't need any more radiation exposure, thank you very much, and I certainly don't want my 7 year old daughter exposed to more radiation than is absolutely necessary either. I haven't seen any estimates on the amount of radiation one scan requires and what amount of exposure that generates and that concerns me. I'd like more information on that before I make any decisions or judgements.


You also need to realize these scans are saved. TSA agents makling about $10-$13 an hour with access to these images could see opportunity to make some side money. How long do you suppose before someone decides to sell your 7 yr old daughter's pic to a pedafile?



posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 12:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Silcone Synapse
The airport body scanners are just the start-soon the cops will have hand held body scanners,which they can use to target passers by,without their consent or knowledge.

Article from 2007:

news.bbc.co.uk...


That doesn't reinforce OP? I believe it helps to trump all arguments in favor of these scans; making them, "null and void"..

Nazi cop says; "haha; I saw her [ your 11 year old daughters'] thing.".



[edit on 8-1-2010 by noconsequence]



posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 12:28 PM
link   
Sky news today had a story about a new type of "explosive residue" scanner,which in terms of detection rate,blows the "naked body" scanners out of the ball park.

It can even be used on crowds!!And it does not reveal your naked flesh,only the illegal materials/bombs etc.

This should be used in all airports IMO,not the naked body scanners which are now being installed across the planet:


The Explosive Residue Detection system - developed by Loughborough University - can scan crowded areas such as airports and train stations remotely, automatically alerting an operator if it finds traces of explosives. The system is non-evasive, works in real time, causes no delays to passengers and is fully automated which means human error can be ruled out, its developers say. And a key point, they argue, is that, unlike the Whole Body Imaging which Prime Minister Gordon Brown has called for, the images the ERD produces are no more controversial than those generated by CCTV.
The machine uses the latest generation of pulsed lasers and video camera techniques and combines them to produce a large-area, fluorescent, lifetime imaging system. By controlling the laser timing and optical filters, direct imaging of explosive residue will be exposed and, if explosive residue is spotted, the system automatically signals the result to a human. Project leader Professor John Tyrer has been working in the terrorism and counter-terrorism field for more than 20 years and says metal detectors and scanning machines are no longer enough.

news.sky.com... =UK_News_Third_UK_News_Article_Teaser_Region__9&lid=ARTICLE_15515674_Terrorism%3A_Device_That_Can_Spot_Explosive_Particles_On_Clothing_May_Be_The_Answ er

No need for the intrusive naked scanners at all it seems...yet thats what they will use-even though they do not always detect explosives!!
Again-you couldn't make it up!



posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 12:35 PM
link   
as for my self and to put in my two cents .....

i was strip searched at the airport in bergen at 16 , i had no drugs , no nothing....


personaly you all may feel these body scanners are a bad thing and all of that , but i for one who speaks from experiance would prefer the body scanners to strip searches any day of the week.



posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 12:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Silcone Synapse
Sky news today had a story about a new type of "explosive residue" scanner,which in terms of detection rate,blows the "naked body" scanners out of the ball park.

No need for the intrusive naked scanners at all it seems...yet thats what they will use-even though they do not always detect explosives!!
Again-you couldn't make it up!


Thank you for, "bottom lining" it. Now I will be forced to star your post. There you go; the in thread answer.

[edit on 8-1-2010 by noconsequence]

[edit on 8-1-2010 by noconsequence]



posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 12:38 PM
link   
To all of the people saying, "You have a choice. Don't fly."

That is a bogus argument/statement. How far does it go? When does it end? Sure, we may have the choice, but how many choices will be eliminated? What's next, scanners in your work? In all government buildings? In EVERY building??

"You have a choice. Don't go anywhere."

It kinda brings a new light to this stupid idea.

It's invasion of privacy. Bottom Line.



posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 12:46 PM
link   
This is another crack in the wall of civil liberties I'm affraid and I'm sure that the manufactures of this technology have friends in high places. Despite the apparent threat of terrorism, tales abound of slip-ups in airport security despite more and more procedures being put into place. I often travel in and out of two of the main airports in London and Manchester and see holes throughout.

One of the main flaws in the UK terminals is a malaise and apathy amongst the security staff. Monitors are not watched and bags, upon inspection, are given cursory checks.

Only the other day I heard a tale of how a disable man and his immediate family in Heathrow by-passed the system having been given the most minimal of checks and told how he secreted a number of contraband items through to the departure lounge.



posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 12:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by noconsequence

Thank you for, "bottom lining" it. Now I will be forced to star your post. There you go; the in thread answer.


I aim to please,doesn't always work...
Thanks for the star!

Yeah,the above mentioned "explosive residue" scanners seem a much better bet,better at finding bombs and better at keeping the public happy about privacy.They cost the same as an xray scanner,so there really is no excuse IMO:


It is not cost concerns, he insists, that are the problems - the system cost is about the same as an X-ray one currently in use - just the decision-making process. "From an economic point of view, it makes sense. Tourism is a very important part of the UK's economy and, if people don't feel safe, they won't come here - particularly if they're from the key US market." "The latest attack highlights the worldwide need for explosive residue detection that is quick, accurate, non-evasive and does not cause major delays for the travelling public.

news.sky.com... =UK_News_Third_UK_News_Article_Teaser_Region__9&lid=ARTICLE_15515674_Terrorism%3A_Device_That_Can_Spot_Explosive_Particles_On_Clothing_May_Be_The_Answ er

So basically,its those GD red tape bureaucratic fools that are preventing the implementation of the new type scanners.
According to Sky,at least.



posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 12:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Simon_Boudreaux
 



These scanners are nothing more than a money maker for someone


The Whole of your post is pretty good! I agree with it and others like it.

The fact remains, These systems will be here for some time to come. Might as well make a few bucks from them.

Call me a capitalist scumbag, but I did not get my shares
of Remington ammunition stocks soon enough.

L3 Communications Holdings. The makers of the scanning Systems, among other "high tech" goodies.


L3 Communications Holdings is a merchant supplier of sophisticated, secure communication systems and specialized communication products. They produce secure high data rate communication systems, microwave components, avionics and ocean systems, and telemetry instrumentation and space products. L3 Communications Holdings Inc. has a market cap of $8.43 billion; its shares were traded at around $72.29 with a P/E ratio of 9.9 and P/S ratio of 0.6. The dividend yield of L3 Communications Holdings Inc. stocks is 1.9%. L3 Communications Holdings Inc. had an annual average earning growth of 33.9% over the past 10 years.
\


Gurustock source
Dividend yield is not bad at 1.9%
But the growth over 10 years puts it solidly in the 3 star ranks.

You too could buy this stock. If you think these scanning systems will be everywhere in the future.
You might make a few bucks in the long run.

God I love capitalism, even us "sheeple" can make money
from the systems. I got some shares back in early 2002.
Figured around 20% growth over 10 years. They have been
doing better than I expected. I think I'll hold them a little while longer.



posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 12:57 PM
link   
Personally, it doesn't bother ME stepping into one of these things. As many of you have expressed, ideally we should be comfortable with our own bodies. But this misses the point. There are tons of people out there who have perfectly valid reasons to NOT be comfortable showing off their bodies. There are disabled and disfigured people out there. There are people with freakishly large or small breasts or genitalia. There are young people who have just come thru puberty and are still getting accustomed to their new bodies. It's unjust and abhorrent to a free society to subject people to this kind of indignity. Yes, we have to sacrifice safety for liberty sometimes.



posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 12:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Silcone Synapse

Yeah,the above mentioned "explosive residue" scanners seem a much better bet,better at finding bombs and better at keeping the public happy about privacy.They cost the same as an xray scanner,so there really is no excuse IMO:

So basically,its those GD red tape bureaucratic fools that are preventing the implementation of the new type scanners.
According to Sky,at least.


Then the only logical conclusion is that it has everything to do with exerting control.

When you have families that will allow someone to choose the lesser method for them, to such a degree that you now allow them to fixate upon your children, then they allready have you..

[edit on 8-1-2010 by noconsequence]



posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 01:08 PM
link   
reply to post by noconsequence
 


This is exactly what I believe,sadly.

Its part of thier dark wurlitzer of repeated compliance reinforcement,the constant turning of the screw just testing out what they can put us through before we riot...then when we do,thats when they can bring out their really big toys like the LRAD sound cannon,or taser shotguns.

It really wasn't meant to be this way in our beloved "free world" was it?

Amazing,really-History is there for us to learn from,but do we really ever learn anything,other than history has a habit of repeating?



posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 01:19 PM
link   
The inverted colour trick on "Paint" works. I tried it. You can see the features of the girl's face very clearly. The blue suddenly turns to skin colour!
Note that the GUI is through a PC. Can we be assured that there is limited definition, no chance of colour inversion, no zoom, no way to save/print?
No. As someone mentioned, I can't wait to see J.Lo appear on t'interweb.
From what I can see, an inverted image, with higher definition would be unmistakeably recognizable. Will 'celebrities' get a pass on this - just in case.

This system provides a full body naked picture of whomever enters. Man, woman, or child. Will the screeners be fully trained medical personnel? No, they will be the same people who rummage through your luggage - and you're quite happy with them, right?

[sarcasm] I vote for full cavity searches for all travellers [/sarcasm]



posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 01:30 PM
link   
It is clear it does not improve security as there are many other ways to take down a plane. I won't list them but if you think about it then it's not that hard.

To sum it up:-

-- The scanner is invasive
-- Will cause further travel delays
-- May be bad for your health
-- Offends other religious groups
-- Will create a false sense of "security"
-- Does not combat internal threats hidden inside the body
-- Could be open to abuse
-- Costs a lot of money
-- Existing methods and security processes are not fully used
-- Alternative tech exists which negates a number of the negatives listed
-- What about incoming flights from airports without the scanner?

Further waste of funds and travel disruption created by this program will not make you safer at all. It is a slow dehumanisation tactic to make you feel like a piece of meat rather than an individual.

Control and not security I am sad to say.



posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 01:55 PM
link   
Next time I go to the airport I am definitely going to wear more than just a tin foil hat. I am currently designing my own tin foil lined bra, tin foil lined panties, and tin foil lined boxers for the men. THIS IS A TOTAL VIOLATION OF OUR PRIVACY!

And did anyone notice the timing of this "false flag event", just perfect to deflect from "CLIMATEGATE".

Every pedophile in the world is going to want to work at the airport now.

The American people are not the enemy, this is not necessary. Only muslim men have committed acts of terrorism.



posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 01:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Silcone Synapse
I wonder what Islamic folks feel about the airport scanners-What with them often wishing to cover up their women from mens eyes,I imagine they are not going to like the idea of airport staff studying the naked images of their wives.

Could that be part of the thinking behind the scanners-To further annoy the Muslims?


There we are; back where TPTB tie the tails of the two cats together and throw, "us" across the clothes-line. So, yes it is to offend them; it is to control us through fear.

And the mainstream still will not notice the elite that is orchestrating the whole affair.



posted on Jan, 8 2010 @ 02:19 PM
link   
you guys seem to think that only secruity personnel will see these scans you are very wrong. there is a whole porno scene out there where security guards and store personnel take security video and make videos of it japan and russian porn industries make the most of it. now i am sure most guys behind the camera at airports will be above reproach but it only takes a handfull of sleazeoids and next you could be getting a call saying your 5 yearold has nude pictures of her from a kiddie porn ring. what next are we going to half to get a mri or pet scan to make sure we dont have bombs sewed up inside us like the jokers henchmen in last batman movie.




top topics



 
56
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join