Exposed: Naked Body Scanner Images Of Film Star Printed, Circulated By Airport Staff at Heathrow

reply to post by alienesque


You miss the point, it is not an entirely different topic. Why is everyone being subjected to invasive searches for explosives? Answer: Islamic wanna be martyrs are trying to blow up aircraft loaded with people.

Were it not for those fanatic idiots we would not be going through this crap and I am tired of it. We can keep patching over the problem by treating the symptoms or we can get to the root cause.

Maybe when we get to the point of x-rays to detect surgically implanted bombs and cameras being stuck up your butt, people might finally decide they have had enough and that won't be long, the exploding breast implants are probably on the way already.

reply to post by expat2368


And if it wasn't for our intelligence agencies training, funding and encouraging them to try to blow up our airplanes, we wouldn't need the nudie scanners either.

Just dropped into say my 2 cents.

[edit on 10-2-2010 by David_Reale]

Originally posted by expat2368
reply to post by alienesque

 

You miss the point, it is not an entirely different topic. Why is everyone being subjected to invasive searches for explosives? Answer: Islamic wanna be martyrs are trying to blow up aircraft loaded with people.

1..how many planes have been blown up and how many fly every minute of every hour?

some people wanne kill themselves by driving their cars head on into other cars...should we attach metal test machines to every car to check the drivers not suicidal?

2..not every terror attack is a real terror attack by muslims...some are done by our governments...

your seriously saying we should have less freedoms because some people want to take our freedoms away?

ive nothing against security..but theres a line that should not be crossed if we can truly call ourselves free.....and for me naked body scanners are definitely over that line.

[edit on 10-2-2010 by alienesque]

I'm a white born in America middle aged housewife from the South. I follow him - he, to me, is one of the most handsome men I've ever seen. I saw him in Asoka and fell over myself, bought a copy, and became a closet Bollywood fan. I admit it.

And as for speculations on the man's body, I think Asoka pretty much showed most of it. (And I approved wholeheartedly.)

Great movie btw.


Ok, that said, he's been a bit outspoken about some of the developments of 911 and tightening of govt control.

If I know him, yes, this happened and he decided to just sign the pictures and make the gals happy - but it also served to call attention to the fact that yes, people are lying.

He's got a brain in his head. He's not just a pretty face. (But he sure does have one!)



[edit on 10-2-2010 by hadriana]

reply to post by hadriana



hmm..if he just wanted to make people see that people are lying about the scans..he could have been just a little bit critical instead of playing it down...











Mod Edit: Full quote of preceding post removed. Reply To function used. Please see ABOUT ATS: Warnings for excessive quoting, and how to quote. Thank you - Jak

[edit on 10/2/10 by JAK]

reply to post by hadriana


Interesting... you think he's simply subtly stirring up the hornets nest? That would be very slick of him.

People are saying that the scanners are not connected to printers so this story must be false... I'm not sure I believe that.
It would make sense for these scanners to be connected to a network because if something was found (like a revolver strapped to someone's torso... ) the evidence of that moment of weapon identification would surely need to be shared with different systems used by different specialists for doing different jobs (within context) and also stored for future use (court case).
If the scanners are part of a network, then it is exceedingly likely that printers are connected and available on that network.

So that is why this incident could have (and I think probably) happened as reported.

It's just my opinion....but I do think.....yes...he's VERY slick. And I think it happened just as he reported it. IMO, he's one of the good guys.

He's had more than his share of problems at US airports - I know he's been detained before b/c his name was on the US's computer list.

Edited to add - link to CNN about one detention
edition.cnn.com...

[edit on 10-2-2010 by hadriana]

This could be wrong but I heard that the only people exempt from the new body scans are young muslim men in their twenties with contemptuous attitudes to the decadent west, especially the great satan (America) and frantic pleas not to let them fly from their parents, who identify them as interns with Al Qaida.

If escorted to the flight by a nameless CIA asset, who quickly vanishes after seeing them through check in, these individuals needn't submit to a body scan.

I think that's sensible don't you.

Originally posted by Jinni
This is a scam that attempts to lure people into thinking this whole ordeal is 'OK' because our televised hero 'Sharuh Khan' tolerated it with a thumbs up.

If pop idols think it's ok then so do we!

*Runs off to McDonald's whilst stopping off at Gap on the way with a cup of Starbucks and listening to GaGa foo on my Apple iPod*


[edit on 9-2-2010 by Jinni]

Yes, much better to RAGE QUIT like Alex jones about it all...

A much better way to deal with things...

reply to post by sunny_2008ny


The problem with your source is that the article uses a widely debunked set of pictures; the originals are stock photos, not scanner images, and came from this site:
www.f1online.de...
NSFW

Edited to add warning tag.

[edit on 10-2-2010 by jeanvaljean]

Thinking about it more...he could have been making a joke - that SHOW was really not a serious show at all - and at the same time getting back at airports for problems he's had in the past.

The last thing I think though - the last thing - is that he was somehow saying that the scanners were OK.

You know...another thing...who SAYS you need a printer hooked up to it?

If you had a cell phone with a camera, or a digital camera, you could get a shot just as easy as hitting print screen or whatever.

Thinking of the price that celebrity shots bring, someone will do it.

reply to post by jeanvaljean


Well done! Yes I have serious doubts about the source. But, have you checked the source of the source:

in.news.yahoo.com...

Not saying I trust Yahoo hands down, but this seems to be a real news report on a real incident.... seems to be.

**Just edited to clean up a typo **

[edit on 10/2/2010 by Recouper]

reply to post by alienesque


I want to reply to your comment because I can see why he possibly didn't want to do that.

With being a star of a movie he would undoubtedly want people to watch along with any other movies he stars in in the future, he probably doesn't want to be known as "that middle eastern guy whose against the airport body scanners". But in regards to the incident, he probably would like people to think "hey wait a minute, that's not supposed to happen..!?".

That make sense to me. Do you reckon I could be on the psychological mark here? I mean if I was him, I might go about this the same way...

I love how infowars is using that old debunked image of the naked girl from the stock photo CD for the article. They don't mention that it's not a real body-scanner image. Integrity in journalism, right?

Originally posted by suicydking
I love how infowars is using that old debunked image of the naked girl from the stock photo CD for the article. They don't mention that it's not a real body-scanner image. Integrity in journalism, right?

can you back up your claim?

Post the image in question and the evidence that it is not a real body scanner image.

I know they tried to cover up the problem of detail exposure by adding a filter over the body but that can be turned off and on.

Originally posted by Jinni

Originally posted by suicydking
I love how infowars is using that old debunked image of the naked girl from the stock photo CD for the article. They don't mention that it's not a real body-scanner image. Integrity in journalism, right?

can you back up your claim?

Post the image in question and the evidence that it is not a real body scanner image.

I know they tried to cover up the problem of detail exposure by adding a filter over the body but that can be turned off and on.

I can't post NSFW links here. However, if you google 'body in 360', the first or second link will be a stock photo site. There you will find the images used to make the fake.

You can also google something like 'body scanner photo debunk' and find some discussions on the topic, including credit being given to the clever folks who discovered the fake.

Again, I would love to post direct links, but all of them have NSFW images. If you're really curious, it's all out there and easy to find. There was a thread on ATS that had discussed all of this, but I can't find it right now.

Let it be said though, that I am 100% sure that it is a doctored stock photo.

EDIT: I found a nice SFW link.
Debunking the debunkers: It's a trap!

[edit on 10-2-2010 by suicydking]

reply to post by suicydking


Well here is a real picture from the scanner:

www.100spiare.it...

I don't see how this is vastly different from the woman picture, the level of detail is still the same!

reply to post by Jinni


Wow, you really like fake images. Have you tried looking outside of conspiracy sites for the images?



This is actually a REAL SCANNER IMAGE FOR REAL AND EVERYTHING.

Hardly the same level of detail from your fake photos.

[edit on 2/10/10 by Lillydale]

[edit on 2/10/10 by Lillydale]

Originally posted by Jinni
reply to post by suicydking

 

Well here is a real picture from the scanner:

www.100spiare.it...

I don't see how this is vastly different from the woman picture, the level of detail is still the same!

I have two points to contend with you on this still.

First, I need to point out that infowars did not tell you that it was using a doctored image. You thought it was real. That's deceptive, and not what I would expect from a news site. Especially one that's supposed to be bringing us the 'real truth'. Wouldn't you agree?

Second, the image you posted. All I got was a page with an image on it. No context. Thanks for providing it, but I would appreciate the same thing you asked of me, which is something proving that it's legitimate.

I'm not doubting that these scanners are an invasion of privacy, but i would also like to know if that image is real.