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.

 

One Hundred Naked Citizens: One Hundred Leaked Body Scans

page: 1
11
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 16 2010 @ 03:13 PM
link   

One Hundred Naked Citizens: One Hundred Leaked Body Scans


gizmodo.com

A Gizmodo investigation has revealed 100 of the photographs saved by the Gen 2 millimeter wave scanner from Brijot Imaging Systems, Inc., obtained by a FOIA request after it was recently revealed that U.S. Marshals operating the machine in the Orlando, Florida courthouse had improperly-perhaps illegally-saved images of the scans of public servants and private citizens.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Nov, 16 2010 @ 03:13 PM
link   
I had posted on another topic about these body scans and had stated that these scans that are impossible to save, would show up somewhere on the net.

According to this article, the images are saved and only deleted after the person being scanned are cleared. And this is done at the discretion of the employee operating the machine.

As the article states, it will be a matter of time until I see some of you frequent fliers in your birthday suits floating around the net! Opt out people, before you become someone's new fetish!



gizmodo.com
(visit the link for the full news article)
edit on 16-11-2010 by Mudman21 because: just cause!



posted on Nov, 16 2010 @ 03:20 PM
link   
Big Sis Caught Lying

That's a scary thought. I wonder if they were all hot chicks, important people.. or just a random group of 100 people?



posted on Nov, 16 2010 @ 03:25 PM
link   
The thing I don't understand about this being a big deal is that what you see on the scanner images is barely discernible as a human body. If you watch the video in the link all you see is fuzzy white blobs. I mean I am all against any type of government intrusion into our privacy. However, if we are going to object to this it needs to be for the right reasons. I highly doubt anyone is getting any kind of excitement from the fuzzy white naked images provided by the scanner. I think this should purely be a objection on the grounds of government intrusion. Making about public nudity only dilutes the issue.



posted on Nov, 16 2010 @ 03:25 PM
link   
Well, here we go. This was the smoking gun that we were waiting for. Now to see what happens as a result of this FOIA request. Janet Napolitano can burn in hell.



Peace be with you.

-truthseeker



posted on Nov, 16 2010 @ 03:29 PM
link   
reply to post by wisintel
 


The point is that these machines aren't supposed to save the images regardless of the clarity. This particular machine in the courthouse used the less quality imaging technique but is still the same type of technology. This machine saved over 32,000 pictures, of which Gizmodo used only 100 for the article. The images were supposed to be instantly deleted as per government guidelines. They were not and were saved and distributed illegally according to our 4th amendment rights.
edit on 16-11-2010 by Mudman21 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 16 2010 @ 03:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by wisintel
The thing I don't understand about this being a big deal is that what you see on the scanner images is barely discernible as a human body.


According to many, this is the problem that you don't understand:


While the fidelity of the scans from this machine are of surprisingly low resolution, especially compared to the higher resolution "naked scanners" using the potentially harmful x-ray backscatter technology, the TSA and other government agencies have repeatedly touted the quality of "Advanced Imaging Technology" while simultaneously assuring customers that operators "cannot store, print, transmit or save the image, and the image." According to the TSA—and of course other agencies—images from the scanners are "automatically deleted from the system after it is cleared by the remotely located security officer."


Note: the pictures you have seen were of the low-res. variety and not the x-ray scanners used elsewhere, but of more importance is the fact that the public was told that IMAGES WILL NOT BE STORED, an apparent lie...
edit on 16-11-2010 by LadySkadi because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 16 2010 @ 03:35 PM
link   
Did you see this:
Video: TSA Molesting 3 Year Old Child
vimeo.com...

This must be stopped before it's too late!



posted on Nov, 16 2010 @ 03:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Mudman21
 


Oh.. I missed the whole part about the government getting caught lying.



posted on Nov, 16 2010 @ 04:39 PM
link   
Can't you guys see this is propaganda to get all you haters riled up? You are being manipulated with these images. Look how easy it is to control you people with bunk information.

First off, look how they used multiple pictures of the same person to make it appear like they have more images of people than they really do:

First they show this lady at 0:54:


Then... a few images later they show the same lady again at 1:18:


Nice trick to make you think there is more images than there really are....


Now look at the Date on those images... oh wait you can't. They blocked the Date out so you can't see how irrelevant these images are.

Also, do you realize these images are from a courthouse? They are NOT from an airport. They most likely disable the ability to save images in the airport scanners. Not all the computer software that run the machines are the same. Of course it is possible to save the images, but they probably don't allow that and disable that feature on the airport scanners.

Take a good look at all the images too... quite a few of those people who got their images taken are security personal, and police officers. Major fail.

These images are USELESS. Why on Earth would anyone save them? I know why... because they are used for training purposes. All the images are of "detected" objects, and false alarms. The people who were in the images most likely agreed to have them taken, and these images were created and used to train security personnel.

Oh wow, Gizmodo got a hold of training images to use for propaganda... and most of you are going to eat it up like fresh bait.



posted on Nov, 16 2010 @ 04:54 PM
link   
It is stated in the article that these images are from a scanner at a courthouse. It also states that the images are of public and government officials. Everything you are saying is stated in the article.

Please point out also where it states that these images are for training purposes!



posted on Nov, 16 2010 @ 05:08 PM
link   
I sent Joel, the writer of the article on gizmodo an email on the misleading nature of his article. It could easily and quite possibly correctly be observed as disinformation (though I didn't harp on about that)

Here is my email message: "

Joel, I'm wondering if your article on the leak of 100 "naked" body scans wasn't published to intentionally mislead. I think you should either post a clarification/correction or a new article showing what the actual scanners in the airport show. If you read through the comments you will see how you have confused people and people are deeming the scanners acceptable based on your post, when in fact these images are not from the "naked" scanners. This is everything that is wrong with journalism. Do you get paid for this kind of clever deception? This is disinformation at it's finest and whether or not you are aware of it appears as propaganda for one of the worst organizations in the history of the U.S. Your article is written with language that was used to confuse and decieve. Just the fact that you titled it "One Hundred Naked Citizens: One Hundred Leaked Scans," is misleading. The inclusion of the words Naked and Scan leads people to the conclusion that these are images from the scanners that have been dubbed the naked scanners, which they are not. I assume that the article is posing as pursuing a just cause by damning the fact scans were saved, but the "reveal" of the "true nature" of the scans was the actual goal as it has confused and mislead a lot of the viewers who will believe anything they see. If you were being honest with your intent, you need to realize if you want to get a message out in this day and day you have to deliver the truth in the same way the mainstream media delivers lies, very blunt sensational headlines. The twist of the saved images being from a different kind of scanner is what nullified this article. Now it has done more damage than good I'm afraid."



I suggest everyone write him as this is a disinfo campaign (whether he's aware or not) that is causing people to believe the naked scanners are something they are not.
His email:
joel@gizmodo.com



posted on Nov, 16 2010 @ 05:12 PM
link   
reply to post by gift0fpr0phecy
 


Don't you see what this is? They were posted to mislead the masses into thinking they images from the scanners were this poor. These images aren't even from the same type of technology, not even close to the same scanner yet the article is titled "One Hundred Naked Citizens: One Hundred Leaked Body Scans." Those buzzwords make people draw a connection, so if they don't continue beyond the title and video they are left thinking "those scans aren't bad at all.

Guys.. we can't win against the media, we can only save our own minds.



posted on Nov, 16 2010 @ 05:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mudman21
Please point out also where it states that these images are for training purposes!


Please point out were anyone states these images are NOT for training purposes!

Think about it... look at these images. They are useless. Are you trying to tell me some pervert saved these images? No, these images would be useless to perverts because they don't even show anything.

Think about it... what on Earth would drive someone to save these images? Use that 10 pound sphere on your neck instead of waiting for someone to tell you.

On the right we have normal images that any security camera could capture and record. On the left we have a white blob that somewhat resembles the outline of a human body with zero detail what-so-ever. Why on Earth would anyone waste harddrive/memory space with these useless images?

Look how they are all "detected" status. All these images show objects that have been "detected" and set off the alarm. That is why they were saved, they set the alarm off. Now, tell me why they would save images of government officials setting off the alarm? Why would they feel the need to store a record of government officials setting off the alarm? I know you can do it man, I know you can use logic and reasoning to come to probable conclusions, just think about it.



This image shows a security guy holding a metal detector wand. The detector wand (or the dark space between two bodies) set off the alarm on the scanner, so it is highlighted with a rectangle.

Please tell me why someone would want to save this above image.......

Could it possibly be for training purposes? To train security personnel what certain objects look like in real world situations? To show them the difference between false alarms and the real deal? Just maybe?

Or do you want to go the conspiracy route and think some pervert took these images because he/she has some pixelated white outline fetish?

Logic....

edit on 16-11-2010 by gift0fpr0phecy because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 16 2010 @ 05:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by LadySkadi

Originally posted by wisintel
The thing I don't understand about this being a big deal is that what you see on the scanner images is barely discernible as a human body.


According to many, this is the problem that you don't understand:


While the fidelity of the scans from this machine are of surprisingly low resolution, especially compared to the higher resolution "naked scanners" using the potentially harmful x-ray backscatter technology, the TSA and other government agencies have repeatedly touted the quality of "Advanced Imaging Technology" while simultaneously assuring customers that operators "cannot store, print, transmit or save the image, and the image." According to the TSA—and of course other agencies—images from the scanners are "automatically deleted from the system after it is cleared by the remotely located security officer."


Note: the pictures you have seen were of the low-res. variety and not the x-ray scanners used elsewhere, but of more importance is the fact that the public was told that IMAGES WILL NOT BE STORED, an apparent lie...
edit on 16-11-2010 by LadySkadi because: (no reason given)


Yeah it doesn't even matter that these were saved though as it has nothing to do with civilians and the airport scanners. I rarely say this word but this is obvious disinformation. They posted a pointless article to confuse people into believing this is the type of scanning they are getting at airports. It's to ease the apprehension through deception.



posted on Nov, 16 2010 @ 05:15 PM
link   
double post
edit on 16-11-2010 by GogoVicMorrow because: ...



posted on Nov, 16 2010 @ 05:21 PM
link   
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow
 


I thought that at first... but images of the real scanners have already surfaced and have already been shown in the media. They show way more detail than these. People already know what they are capable of, and plus they admit this isn't the same technology in the article.

So this leads me to believe this is all propaganda/disinformation about the whole "images wont be saved" issue. Someone found what I think is obvious training / demonstration images and are using it as propaganda to making people think all airport scanners are saving images.
edit on 16-11-2010 by gift0fpr0phecy because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 16 2010 @ 05:28 PM
link   
reply to post by gift0fpr0phecy
 


Well.. I wouldn't doubt that images could be saved. Actually I would guarantee they can be and are, but I would doubt that any random worker could access them.

I have never seen the MSM show what these body scans look like, and if you read through the comments (and know how most Americans are) you will see and know that most of them are commenting saying that they knew people were just being paranoid, and that they don't know what the fuss is about the scans are blurry.
Read through these people are seeing this article more than the original scan pics and minds are starting to turn thinking this is what it looks like.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 05:37 AM
link   
maybe the fuzzy white blobs of images is all they are allowing you to see right now. what if the saved images are of much higher resolution?
Only to be deleted by the desecration of the operator? and you trust them to push delete?



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 08:44 AM
link   
I think the bottom line here is we have all been lied to! Quit bickering over photo quality and other BS! The point of the matter is they are saving, and can save the scan of anyone they wish to and access it at any time! If you really think that the people at those machines are not capable of looking at those photos then you are fooling yourself! The other problem here is it is only a matter of time before some sick fetish freak with a glorified position and name badge that can access these files copies them for their own personal use, or even worse sells them! If they can be saved they can be copied!

There is absolutely no reason that the conventional techniques shouldn't still be employed other than the fact that these people are just too damn lazy to do their jobs correctly!



new topics

top topics



 
11
<<   2 >>

log in

join