What airport scanners really see, page 1

privacy

Pages: << 1 2 3 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 6 times

Topic started on 9-1-2010 @ 05:40 PM by xstealth

I was a little disturbed to see this, the photos they show on TV and news sites show outlines of breasts and genitals, but this is what is really going on.

EDIT: It has been brought to my attention that these images are fake.

THIS is overboard, this is a direct violation of our privacy and an outrage.

I myself was randomly selected to go through one of these boarding an international flight. I knew about these machines because I heard Alex Jones talking about them over a year ago. I decided not to cause a scene, and the flight was important.

Had I known what I know now, I would have ABSOLUTELY refused no matter the consequences. Its not that I am embarrassed if someone sees my junk, but its the principle I would refuse.

When I was at the airport they had a woman's voice discussing rules and information from homeland security. It really reminded me of the movie 'Total Recall', the whole situation just seemed like we AREN'T the customers, we are the herd, and we are constantly monitored and scared into submission.

Are you going to refuse? Is it worth it to let possible perverts look at you, your wife, your children naked for the sake of security?

[edit on 9/1/10 by xstealth]

[edit on 9/1/10 by xstealth]

reply posted on 9-1-2010 @ 05:41 PM by alienseeker

fixed your link

[SNIP]

[edit on 9-1-2010 by alienseeker]

Mod Edit: Embedded video removed due to nudity in video.

[edit on 10-1-2010 by Gemwolf]

reply posted on 9-1-2010 @ 05:42 PM by Now_Then

The URL contained a malformed video ID.

Any chance you can fix the link? - Remember you only use everything after the ='s in the url to embed

reply posted on 9-1-2010 @ 05:42 PM by xstealth

Sorry, I put the whole URL in the video except the video ID.

Fixed now.

reply posted on 9-1-2010 @ 05:44 PM by Illusionsaregrander

reply to post by xstealth

Those images have already been debunked in another thread. They are apparently photoshopped stock images of a naked woman.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

[edit on 9-1-2010 by Illusionsaregrander]

reply posted on 9-1-2010 @ 05:45 PM by la2

This is the real issue.

I praise you for the way you have gone about this post, its not a new topic, but you have done it so much better than the others, focused on the issue and not the hype, well done.

reply posted on 9-1-2010 @ 05:47 PM by anoymous7

Some nice breasts...

O and if it is a hoax, I'm sure its not far from the real thing.

[edit on 9-1-2010 by anoymous7]

reply posted on 9-1-2010 @ 05:48 PM by xynephadyn

S+F Wow-- disturbing. It might be fun to tape a sign to your but or private area that says "my legal right" screw them

reply posted on 9-1-2010 @ 05:48 PM by whoshotJR

Originally posted by la2
This is the real issue.

I praise you for the way you have gone about this post, its not a new topic, but you have done it so much better than the others, focused on the issue and not the hype, well done.

Did you not read at all ? No he didn't, he is trying to perpetuate a hoax. The goal of bringing fake stuff like this to the table is to provoke anger and outrage and see the issue the way the OP does even if he needs to bend the facts to do so.

This is not good at all and its sad you would think so. This is the exact opposite of what you should hope for on a site.

reply posted on 9-1-2010 @ 05:50 PM by anoymous7

Originally posted by whoshotJR

Originally posted by la2
This is the real issue.

I praise you for the way you have gone about this post, its not a new topic, but you have done it so much better than the others, focused on the issue and not the hype, well done.

Did you not read at all ? No he didn't, he is trying to perpetuate a hoax. The goal of bringing fake stuff like this to the table is to provoke anger and outrage and see the issue the way the OP does even if he needs to bend the facts to do so.

This is not good at all and its sad you would think so. This is the exact opposite of what you should hope for on a site.

Well wheres the real images then? Exactly.

[edit on 9-1-2010 by anoymous7]

reply posted on 9-1-2010 @ 06:01 PM by Nematode

A fake or not, this topic does pose good questions, the technology will be there to do exactly this some time soon in the future. The question is, what's the limit? How naked is too naked, inverted is better than not, but simple inverting functions will reveal the real image.

reply posted on 9-1-2010 @ 06:10 PM by whoshotJR

Originally posted by anoymous7

Originally posted by whoshotJR

Originally posted by la2
This is the real issue.

I praise you for the way you have gone about this post, its not a new topic, but you have done it so much better than the others, focused on the issue and not the hype, well done.

Did you not read at all ? No he didn't, he is trying to perpetuate a hoax. The goal of bringing fake stuff like this to the table is to provoke anger and outrage and see the issue the way the OP does even if he needs to bend the facts to do so.

This is not good at all and its sad you would think so. This is the exact opposite of what you should hope for on a site.

Well wheres the real images then? Exactly.

[edit on 9-1-2010 by anoymous7]

Exactly what?

911debunkers.blogspot.com...

Read that. These are just pictures of a naked person, not a body that's scanned. So yes they do look very much like a naked person would.

aftermathnews.files.wordpress.com...

This is what the scans look like. If you find that hot you have issues. You would see far more by going to any beach or swimming pool in the US. So before people start throwing fits about kids and such they should think about what a pediatric dr see's or every beach in the world.

[edit on 9-1-2010 by whoshotJR]

reply posted on 9-1-2010 @ 06:12 PM by WTFover

reply to post by Illusionsaregrander

Thanks for posting that "Hoax" post link. I had, briefly, looked at the other thread, but did not know it had been debunked. Didn't really care, because I don't have a problem with the scanners being used in secondary. I, also, understand a person has the option to request a pat down, in lieu of the scanner.

Now, if you could only get some lazy people to follow the link! Seems to be a rash of people replying to the OP, without reading the rest of the discussion. What are we gonna do, though?

reply posted on 9-1-2010 @ 06:16 PM by anoymous7

Originally posted by whoshotJR

Originally posted by anoymous7

Originally posted by whoshotJR

Originally posted by la2
This is the real issue.

I praise you for the way you have gone about this post, its not a new topic, but you have done it so much better than the others, focused on the issue and not the hype, well done.

Did you not read at all ? No he didn't, he is trying to perpetuate a hoax. The goal of bringing fake stuff like this to the table is to provoke anger and outrage and see the issue the way the OP does even if he needs to bend the facts to do so.

This is not good at all and its sad you would think so. This is the exact opposite of what you should hope for on a site.

Well wheres the real images then? Exactly.

[edit on 9-1-2010 by anoymous7]

Exactly what?

911debunkers.blogspot.com...

Read that. These are just pictures of a naked person, not a body that's scanned. So yes they do look very much like a naked person would.

aftermathnews.files.wordpress.com...

This is what the scans look like. If you find that hot you have issues. You would see far more by going to any beach or swimming pool in the US. So before people start throwing fits about kids and such they should think about what a pediatric dr see's or every beach in the world.

[edit on 9-1-2010 by whoshotJR]

lol issues ok...

My issue is people thinking these scanners are going to make them safer from terrorists attacks.

reply posted on 9-1-2010 @ 06:22 PM by whoshotJR

reply to post by anoymous7

So you really have no argument and wont retract your statements above? You are in favor of people spreading lies if it helps keep people "Safe" from these scanners.

Sounds very familiar..... ohh that's right its the exact problem you have with what you see the government doing to the people supposedly.

As stated above, people can also just opt for a pat down if they are selected and don't want to do this. I can tell you that many people I know would find the pat downs way worse then the above image being taken of them.

Does it solve all the problems with security? no it doesn't. But it seems like it is a better step then some of the options we currently have. Flying isn't a right it's a service provided by private companies.

reply posted on 9-1-2010 @ 06:25 PM by JBA2848

This is from the "more info" button on youtube video.

A quick look at what is/will be available for the airport screeners to view...in the name of safety, of course.

www.infowars.com...

The full body scanners that President Obama last night authorized to be rolled out in airports across the country at a cost of over $1 billion dollars not only produce detailed pictures of your genitals, but once inverted some of those images also display YOUR NAKED BODY in full living COLOR.

And you dont need to be a graphics wizard using a $600 software suite like Photoshop to pull off the trick inverting a photo is a simple process that takes one click and is an option available even in the most BASIC image editing software.

We were sent examples of the process by readers and then tested it for ourselves to confirm that simply inverting some of the pictures produced by the body scanners creates a near-perfect replica of a naked body in full color.

It is important to stress that this is a low resolution image. Airport screeners will have access to huge HIGH DEFINATION images that, once inverted, will allow them to see every minute detail of your body.

The inversion trick doesn't work for all the sample images produced by body scanners, but with or without its application, every image will still show details of your sexual organs. Even without being inverted, the images already BREAK CHILD PORN LAWS in the UK.
.

So how many people think the security people are going to be able to bring there laptop "with photoshop on it" in and hook it up to a million dollar piece of hardware at the airport in order to see you nude like those pictures show. I would hope that security wouldn't allow anything to be hooked up to these machines in fear that they were being hacked or sabotaged to not work correctly.

reply posted on 9-1-2010 @ 06:25 PM by anoymous7

Originally posted by whoshotJR
reply to post by anoymous7

So you really have no argument and wont retract your statements above? You are in favor of people spreading lies if it helps keep people "Safe" from these scanners.

Sounds very familiar..... ohh that's right its the exact problem you have with what you see the government doing to the people supposedly.

As stated above, people can also just opt for a pat down if they are selected and don't want to do this. I can tell you that many people I know would find the pat downs way worse then the above image being taken of them.

Does it solve all the problems with security? no it doesn't. But it seems like it is a better step then some of the options we currently have. Flying isn't a right it's a service provided by private companies.

Is a pat down or a scan going to get the explosives that are surgically implanted in the terrorist?

My point being, Is these scanners will do nothing to thwart terrorism and will only infringe on our remaining rights.

reply posted on 9-1-2010 @ 06:26 PM by xstealth

I didn't know the images were fake. But accusing me of trying to start a hoax is ludicrus, so I edited the OP.

But the fact still remains, how far will this go?

reply posted on 9-1-2010 @ 06:27 PM by Dasher

Regardless of specific pictures being a hoax or not, the scanners are still the same concept...

What makes this sort of thing scare so many people is that it makes us feel like animals. Do you follow what I mean? Exposing our bodies, removing person to person communion/communication, being herded through lines, not having the power to escape the required inspections, etc. Here's the thing... When the powers who control many people do not know the people, this is how life goes. Would you ever expect this in a tribe/neighborhood? Would you ever expect this in a union of tribes? We are a union of tribes. Collections of neighborhoods and families. The fear within leaders brings death through Pride. The fear within the people brings death through Chaos. The separation of the people and the power results in many problems. Regardless of what form of government or economics we live under, regardless of how free we are, when the powers do not know those whom they have power over, there will be Pride and Chaos. For that death to be avoided, we must not setup such powerful cities and towers. The story of the city and it's tower in the bible teaches much about this. We should return to a place in our hearts where our neighbors and families are our country and our collective conscience will bridal Pride and Chaos much better (although not perfectly) than those who think they can play gods with our lives from afar.

[edit on 1/9/2010 by Dasher]

reply posted on 9-1-2010 @ 06:29 PM by TSOM87

Originally posted by anoymous7

Originally posted by whoshotJR
reply to post by anoymous7

So you really have no argument and wont retract your statements above? You are in favor of people spreading lies if it helps keep people "Safe" from these scanners.

Sounds very familiar..... ohh that's right its the exact problem you have with what you see the government doing to the people supposedly.

As stated above, people can also just opt for a pat down if they are selected and don't want to do this. I can tell you that many people I know would find the pat downs way worse then the above image being taken of them.

Does it solve all the problems with security? no it doesn't. But it seems like it is a better step then some of the options we currently have. Flying isn't a right it's a service provided by private companies.

Is a pat down or a scan going to get the explosives that are surgically implanted in the terrorist?

My point being, Is these scanners will do nothing to thwart terrorism and will only infringe on our remaining rights.

So what would you do then?

2ndline

Tsom87

Pages: << 1 2 3 >> ^^TOP^^