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.

 

Revealing Body Scan Leads To Alleged TSA Beating

page: 1
5

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 10 2010 @ 03:32 PM
link   

Revealing Body Scan Leads To Alleged TSA Beating


kdka.com

a TSA worker from Miami International Airport was arrested after police say he attacked a colleague who mocked his genitalia after he walked through a new, high-tech scanner. ...

according to the police report, it "revealed [Negron] had a small penis." ...

The case serves to fuel the debate over security versus privacy. Civil libertarians have decried the body scans as unwarranted strip searches.

The machine creates an image that looks like a fuzzy negative.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on May, 10 2010 @ 03:32 PM
link   
For everyone who has been saying that the images are suppose to be fuzzy and you don't see everything, then why is this man being teased by his co-worker for his small male part?

The more I hear about these things, the more I believe that what the TSA is saying about blurred/fuzzy/blue image like a doll is a lie. These machines can get a good clear image. At least clear enough to tell the size of private parts, and what they look like.

It really does sound like the machine is stripping you down, except it is a hands off. I believe if the public really knew what the TSA people were really seeing, that they would out right refuse to go through the machine.

I honestly think if they could look at themselves on the TSA side, no one would be going through the machine. Everyone would be taking the pat down instead.

I don't think this case alone will make a dent in restricting the machines or discontinue the use of them. I think it is only going to be a matter of time before images are leaked to the public of what the TSA really sees. If they are bad enough, I could see a class action against the makers and those using the machines.

I really do hope eventually it turns into a huge privacy issue, and those machines are done away with all together.

kdka.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on May, 10 2010 @ 03:39 PM
link   
Well you can check yourself....

Here is a link to a body scanner image.

Warning Viewer Discretion is Advised: This video is for example purposes only to illustrate what is seen by the TSA while doing a body scan. It is posted for no other purpose.



It looks to me like things are visible that shouldn't be. Then again the TSA has no problem humiliating anyone, even a fellow TSA employee.

I hope the culprits are reprimanded but it will most likely do no good whatsoever.

Its a pedophile's dream too. I can see it now, apply for the TSA, see little boys naked. Or maybe some hot little teenager gets scanned. Yeah like these people are mature enough to handle that!

[edit on 10-5-2010 by DaMod]



posted on May, 10 2010 @ 04:11 PM
link   
I don't want to be scanned...

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on May, 10 2010 @ 04:15 PM
link   
They try to blag you and say you can't see body parts,when in fact the system would not work if it could not see such parts-otherwise how could it differentiate between a bomb or "private" part?

Same happened in UK recently,a worker got a female employee to go in the scanner,then gave it loads of "woah,nice T..."
He got sacked I think.

Its not a good system for that reason alone,for it creates distractions for people who should really be looking for bombs/guns rather than who can take a snap of the nicest ass for youtube.

That,and it does not always "see" explosives of course.

With regards to the underwear bomber for example:


So would naked scanners have exposed the pants? When asked if naked scanners would have detected the small quantity of explosives involved in the pants incident even Johnson, who was trying to big up this illiberal hi-tech toy, couldn't say more than: "the indications are that given where the PETN was placed, there would have been a 50 to 60 per cent. chance of its being detected." Many experts do not agree, the Independent newspaper reported [3]: "Scanners can certainly pick up metal objects including knives, but whether they could have detected powder plastic explosive such as the 3oz of PETN is extremely doubtful. The kind of explosive Abdulmutallab used was low-density and so probably wouldn't have shown up on the scanner."


www.corbettreport.com...

Hooray we are so much safer now!!!
Great...



new topics

top topics
 
5

log in

join