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

reply to post by Lillydale



Well here is another one:

www.boston.com...

the ABOVE is includes backscatter X_RAY and the millimeter wave.

However, the millimetre wave is still revealing as you can clearly see on the website

Today Millimetre, Tomorrow X-Ray or something else more upgraded to further subjugate the people.

Don't allow the frog to be boiled.

IF YOU THINK YOU DISINFO TACTIC OF PLAYING DOWN THE IMAGES IS GOING TO WORK HERE YOU ARE WRONG. WE WON'T ACCEPT REGARDLESS.



[edit on 10-2-2010 by Jinni]

Originally posted by Jinni
reply to post by Lillydale

 

Well here is another one:

www.boston.com...

the ABOVE is includes backscatter X_RAY and the millimeter wave.

However, the millimetre wave is still revealing as you can clearly see on the website

Today Millimetre, Tomorrow X-Ray or something else more upgraded to further subjugate the people.

Don't allow the frog to be boiled.

IF YOU THINK YOU DISINFO TACTIC OF PLAYING DOWN THE IMAGES IS GOING TO WORK HERE YOU ARE WRONG. WE WON'T ACCEPT REGARDLESS.



[edit on 10-2-2010 by Jinni]

Seeing as how you just accused me of being a disinfo agent, and of working against the interests of ATS members ("WE WON'T ACCEPT REGARDLESS.), I shouldn't even dignify your last post with a response.

However, in the interest of furthering the pursuit of the truth, and protecting our rights as citizens, I will reply.

Every time you propagate fraudulent information, even if it is for a good cause, you are hurting the cause. Don't you understand that?

Infowars may be trying to fight the good fight, but since they use fake pictures in their articles and make no effort to inform their readers that it's a fake, I can no longer trust them for my news. They blew it. They could have just as easily used a real image from a scanner, but instead used a doctored shot that was debunked weeks ago.

If the folks at infowars did this unknowingly, all that means is that they didn't check their sources well enough, which is just as good a reason to stop reading their site.

I went ahead and pointed out that these images were fakes, so that we could get closer to the real truth of the situation, and you accuse me of spreading disinfo? What kind of backwards world do you live in? I even mentioned how I feel that these scanners are an invasion of privacy. I just don't think we need to use fake images to make our point.

You have a chip on your shoulder, and are obviously looking for adversaries. You did the right thing by asking me to provide proof of my claim, but then you fell off. You showed a double standard. You ask for the proof from anyone who disagrees, but you don't feel that you should apply the same standard to yourself.

I'm telling you all of this because we are on the same side, so to speak. I just want everyone fighting for the 'good guys' to do it with integrity, instead of falling into the same behavior as those who wish to control us would do.

EDIT: Looks like you were accusing Lillydale of spreading disinfo, not me. I apologize for that. My point still stands.

[edit on 10-2-2010 by suicydking]

reply to post by suicydking


I know nitpicking is a disinfo agent tactic which people may knowingly or unknowingly do.

The images are there and THEY are revealing.

The SCANNERS have a negative effect on the body.

The Scanners demoralise, embarrass and subjugate the people.

The scanners create the sense of a prison planet.

The scanners are the precedent for further intrusive technologies.

Isn't that enough to talk about or do we really need to nitpick on which image is real and which isn't? The fact is they are revealing to say the least.

Originally posted by Jinni
IF YOU THINK YOU DISINFO TACTIC OF PLAYING DOWN THE IMAGES IS GOING TO WORK HERE YOU ARE WRONG. WE WON'T ACCEPT REGARDLESS.

Where can I pick up my check then? Do not yell DISINFO at me. If you want to assume what I am all about, I have a very long post history you can check. You can be lazy and call me names instead, up to you.

I find it funny that you accuse me of disinfo when you clearly posted a fake pictures on the previous page. Whether you are for or against the scanners, a lie is a lie and posting fake pictures is disinfo.

I am not here supporting the scanners, just supporting the truth. I find it odd you acknowledge (sort of) that your pic is fake while yelling disinfo at me. I could care less about the scanners as they do not apply to me in any way shape or form.

I do care about people posting fake crap on ATS to fear monger though.

reply to post by Lillydale


Where is your so called truth about the harmful effects on man and society caused by these Scanners?!?!

All I can see you do is cry out 'fake'.

You sir are a devout disinfo peddler simply by distracting people away from the real issues.

You can take that to the bank too.

Originally posted by Jinni
reply to post by Lillydale

 

Where is your so called truth about the harmful effects on man and society caused by these Scanners?!?!

I am sorry but I am really not sure what you are asking me for. Did I claim to be holding on to some specific "truth?"

All I can see you do is cry out 'fake'.

That is because they were fake.

All I had to say about the fake pictures is that they were fake.

Did you want an essay about it? How many words does it take you to tell someone that something they posted is fake? It only takes me a few. I am stunned that what upsets you is the brevity of my comments.

You sir are a devout disinfo peddler simply by distracting people away from the real issues.

Sir? My name is Lilly, Genius!

Can you please explain to me how pointing out your evidence is fake and posting the truth makes me a "disinfo" peddler?

Please explain why LYING about the pics is more truthful than just posting the real pics as I did? EXPLAIN THAT TO ME.

You can take that to the bank too.

Not until you sign it with an explanation as to how that makes any sense. You need to endorse your check before I can take it anywhere!


p.s. Thanks for picking the 'stay lazy and just call me names' route. That tells me much about you. I mean, aside from what I learned by watching you post a blatant lie and then continue to shout 'DISINFO AGENT' at me for posting the truth.

[edit on 2/10/10 by Lillydale]

reply to post by Lillydale


So what do you really think about the adoption of these body scanners?

Answer that please.

reply to post by Jinni


I do not fly. I do not need to fly. I never enjoyed dealing with airlines, waiting in lines, or being subjected to the rules of a private business while I make my way from point A to point B. Do you still really want my opinion of them since they do not impact me? Some people might say that my opinion of them matters not since I already choose not to utilize private airports.

My point is, there are plenty of ways to get around and it scares me that people seem to think everyone will be forced onto a privately owned airliner soon. I will not be among them. Does my opinion still count?

reply to post by Lillydale


Thanks for clearing that up then.

That explains why you pick on the photo and not on the 'idea', ''concept' itself.

Here is a poem you might find relevant:

First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak out for me.

en.wikipedia.org...

Originally posted by Jinni
reply to post by Lillydale

 

Thanks for clearing that up then.

That explains why you pick on the photo and not on the 'idea', ''concept' itself.

Um...nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo.

The reason I pick on the picture and not the concept is because I am a big fan of something silly called the TRUTH. I know, it makes me a weirdo, old fashioned, out of place, whatever. I can not help myself. I like the truth. It just seems to be the best way to go about things.

I think it is great you are all discussing these things but do you not think that the discussion would be more beneficial if it were based on facts? I would honestly like to know.

Here is a poem yoblah blah blah

I have heard it. It is old. It does not apply here at all. No one is coming for anyone. The day someone comes for me and puts me through a scanner, things will change. As it stands, I have the same choice about going through them I have always had and that is to choose not to. Nothing has changed about my option. Do you live somewhere that people are forced to fly on privately owned airlines?

Help me out here. Tell me how they are coming for you and why you prefer a lie to the truth in discussing this.

Um, I may have missed this, but is this Indian Film Star story being carried anywhere besides infowars, and yahoo india?

Anyway from the in.yahoo link from my earlier post, here is a quote that I missed earlier.

"But the Indian star, who is here for the London premier of his new film 'My Name is Khan', said he was 'a little tense' because of threats by Shiv Sena activists in Mumbai to stop screenings of the film.

'I didn't say much. All I said was that we are Indians and we should welcome everyone with open arms into our country. We cannot say 'No, this country's people can't come or that country's people can't come',' said Khan.

'It's been blown out of proportion, and now they're stopping my film and not allowing it to be released. I'm a little tense.'

Khan was cheered wildly by the studio audience at the BBC show - an indication of the rising mainstream appeal of Bollywood films in Britain"


OK, what does this mean? In an earlier post, someone mentioned this incident could possibly be a media gimmick for the purpose of putting people at ease with the scanners and falling in like good little sheeple and accepting it.

In the article I myself first linked to hear is this above quote. It seems there has been some kind of political tensions with Mumbai regarding this film stars new film. Then he says this,

"We cannot say 'No, this country's people can't come or that country's people can't come',' said Khan."

What?

That sounds like he is talking about people flying in and out of his country and being SCANNED.

OK thats my contribution.

This is absolute garbage because they guy himself was being interviewed on friday night with jonathan ross on bbc1 last friday night, and they got on the subject of airport scanners and the actor himself had a joke about them and quite clearly stated that he had seen his own scan and he autographed the scan for the women who working on the scanners at the time having a joke with them, so that info is complete rubbish!

reply to post by Lillydale


You are a prime example of that poem where you have displayed a 'don't care cos I don't fly' attitude yet you pick on the authenticity of photos. Of course the poem applies in this case.

The actual pictures are bad enough and the potential damage that may be done is bad enough.

But here we have termites trying to eat away at grammatical errors and authenticity of certain photos whilst completely missing the big picture.

You are employing a disinfo agent tactc

Originally posted by brettcal82
This is absolute garbage because they guy himself was being interviewed on friday night with jonathan ross on bbc1 last friday night, and they got on the subject of airport scanners and the actor himself had a joke about them and quite clearly stated that he had seen his own scan and he autographed the scan for the women who working on the scanners at the time having a joke with them, so that info is complete rubbish!

They are not just storing and printing photos! They are also recording other information related to your physical properties.

Also, if it is not within policy to store or print why the hell are there printers connected with these machines? Any print out is considered storage too.

These scanners need to be ripped out and boycotted.

Originally posted by Jinni
reply to post by Lillydale

 

You are a prime example of that poem where you have displayed a 'don't care cos I don't fly' attitude yet you pick on the authenticity of photos. Of course the poem applies in this case.

If I said I did not care because I was not something, you would have a point. I think you missed the entire point of it yourself as it is about people who are victims of circumstance. Flying is not a circumstance, it is an easily avoided choice. Maybe ask your history teacher to explain what the poem is actually about. I thought it was pretty clear but I guess not.

Do you know anyone that was born an airline passenger?

The actual pictures are bad enough and the potential damage that may be done is bad enough.

That may be true. It is debatable. It is only debatable when you actually have the real pictures though. You cannot debate the problem with the real scans when you are looking at fake ones. I hope you see why that is kind of illogical as all hell.

But here we have termites trying to eat away at grammatical errors and authenticity of certain photos whilst completely missing the big picture.

LOL. I am a disinfo agent and a termite because I pointed out that the picture you were using was fake? Are you for real? You fully acknowledge you were peddling what is otherwise known as A LIE. You then have the gonads to call me names like this and even insult me BECAUSE I posted the real picture?

I am open to having a real discussion about these scanners with people interested in discussing reality. You seem hellbent on fearmongering through lies. I must apologize since it seems to be upsetting you that I will not play that game simply because it is dishonest.

You are employing a disinfo agent tactc

I also wondered if I could confirm the scans could be immediately printed (and thus autographed). (that IS one independent way to confirm this story).

Here is what I could find. Does anyone know who makes these machines? I am having trouble finding that information. Here is what I found regarding scanner specs, for working and in use body scanners.

"A TSA official who spoke on condition of anonymity because the official is not authorized to speak on the record said all full-body scanners have "strong privacy protections in place" and are delivered to airports "without the capability to store, print or transmit images."

"There is no way for someone in the airport environment to put the machine into the test mode," the official said, adding that test mode can be enabled only in TSA test facilities. But the official declined to say whether activating test mode requires additional hardware, software or simply additional knowledge of how the machines operate."


www.cnn.com...

*****************************************************


The article claims the currently in use scanners should have NO capability to print.

Would anyone help me research this further? Like the official says (anonymously, hmm) he really does not know what extra measures have to be taken to be able to print. Too ambiguous for my liking.

reply to post by Lillydale


You are polluting this thread with your nonsense rants about you telling the truth about the authenticity of this picture.

Because of that you are creating a cloud of egoistical text that adds nothing to the condemnation of the notion of scanners.

Because of the text cloud you create it is hard for people to see what the real problems are (other than authenticity of the pictures).

So now I think you are employing disinfo tactic number 2 - swamp a thread with nonsense so it becomes hard to see what the problems arw.

Originally posted by hotbakedtater


Here is what I could find. Does anyone know who makes these machines? I am having trouble finding that information.

I'm sure QinetiQ had originally made such machines:

www.engadget.com...

Originally posted by Jinni

Originally posted by brettcal82
This is absolute garbage because they guy himself was being interviewed on friday night with jonathan ross on bbc1 last friday night, and they got on the subject of airport scanners and the actor himself had a joke about them and quite clearly stated that he had seen his own scan and he autographed the scan for the women who working on the scanners at the time having a joke with them, so that info is complete rubbish!

They are not just storing and printing photos! They are also recording other information related to your physical properties.

Also, if it is not within policy to store or print why the hell are there printers connected with these machines? Any print out is considered storage too.

These scanners need to be ripped out and boycotted.

This is the first I've heard of the scanners 'recording other information related to your physical properties'. Could you please elaborate on this?

Originally posted by Strype

Originally posted by T0by
I have a nice body, I don't care if people see it.

I hope you have a lot of money as well, and don't care if people use it. Because it's your money, along with the other "ugly" taxpayers, that are going to be paying for the "inadequate solutions" to this problem.


Strype

[edit on 10-2-2010 by Strype]

I'm used to my tax money being used for stupid things.