OUTRAGE: The first of the leaked body scans! (Yours will be next)

[grahamhgreen]

Run time: 01:44 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mJ4odo7T9w8   Posted on YouTube: November 16, 2010 By YouTube Member: AllWeNeedIsAHero Views on YouTube: 315   Posted on DU: November 16, 2010 By DU Member: grahamhgreen Views on DU: 2439

 
"After news hit that U.S. Marshals operating a body scanner machine in a courthouse had stored 35,000 images — despite the fact that the machines were supposed to be incapable of saving them — Gizmodo made a Freedom of Information Act request and received 100 of the shots.

The images, which arrived with identifying features already removed, depict the millimeter wave technique. This is considered to be the "less embarrassing" body scan, since, as you can see, it doesn't depict the body with much clarity.

But Gizmodo's writer Joel Johnson makes a point of saying that the higher-fidelity x-ray backscatter systems, the "naked scanners," are also in use, and may very well have the same image retention capabilities: "


Who will be next?

You, or your loved ones?

[fascisthunter]

1. Hell, they have to pay me first

I'm not offering my body to service people for free. Uh-uh....

[happygoluckytoyou]

20. i'd rather have them grab my junk... in fact... i'll pay them the same $3 a min. i do for phone sex

[fascisthunter]

27. lol.... laughing is good

I love the sense of humor around here... thanks

[KansDem]

2. Why did they save them?

I know we've had this discussion before, but this is the first time we can actually see images that weren't suppose to the saved.

Did the US Marshals have an explanation?

[sabrina 1]

4. They are not supposed to save them, but this has happened before

The point is, these scanners are a violation of the Constitution. Are the people going to fight or once again cave in to yet more oppression with the government using 'fear' to get their compliance.

The more compliant we are, the further they will go. If history has not taught this lesson, then we deserve everything that they have in store for us.

[MrModerate]

21. As in "unreasonable search?" -- I don't buy it.

My sole concerns with these devices are:

1) Health risks (if any) of the radiation

2) Effectiveness (because we don't want to spend a zillion dollars to equip airports with devices that only give a false sense of security)

Unlike you, I don't feel I'm being violated by someone 100 yards away looking at an anonymized outline of my body. It just doesn't seem unreasonable.

And the high likelihood that some photos will be saved and leaked is unfortunate, but it doesn't strike me as very important.

[sabrina 1]

23. It's already happened. YOU may give up your rights not to be subjected unreasonable

and sexually criminal 'enhanced patdowns' or strip searches, you do not have the right to give up mine or the millions of others who have objected to these scans for years.

In 2004 they were challenged by the Civil Liberties Union, and unable to defend them then, they were not put into use. But the greedy, corrupt, and now we know, sexually perverted employees of the American people the creepily named Homeland Security, would not give up the opportunity to use 9/11, once again, to profit from people's fear.

Well it seems people are now fear their own government more than they fear the possibility of a terrorist attack. Groping a three year old little girl was more than most decent people are willing to stand by and tolerate in the interests of 'security'.

No one I know will tolerate this abuse. We, me, friends and family will not be flying until law and order is restored to this country. Jails are filled with perverts who groped people without their consent. This 'enhanced patdown' is nothing more than sexual assault and has been reported as such by victims of it.

Otoh, it's a great job for sexual perverts and I'm sure many of them will be applying for the job.

Even in the training program for these obscene machines, so far one man and one woman were abused by their fellow workers.

People tell their children never to let a stranger touch them inappropriately. When that little three-year old girl cried and asked the TSA worker 'stop touching me' I think we all know this country has gone to hell.

The opposition to this is growing even as I type this and I hope that as in the past when they tried to force this on people, once again, they will be stopped. Until then I won't be flying anywhere.

Michael Chertoff and his 'clients' will sooner or later have to find some other way to make money other than off the memories of the victims of 9/11. Enough is enough.

[MrModerate]

24. I think I understand your anger, but I don't think this issue will get any serious traction.

It'll be a three-day wonder and fade away.

And a lot of what you say is a tad hyperbolic.

My position is that a bodyscan doesn't strike me as an unreasonable search. You may disagree, but it's not legit to say I'm throwing others' rights away because my definition of those rights differs from yours.

I have mixed feelings about the enhanced patdowns. I've never seen them in person or experienced one myself -- just the regular patdowns, which are unexceptional. The enhanced patdown is not "nothing more than sexual assault" -- it's an enhanced patdown for security purposes. If you (and others) think it crosses the line into "inappropriate touching" or even sexual assault, you're entitled to your opinion and I might agree with you. But characterizing it as something it's not doesn't help either.

For good or ill, some form of security measure involving the screening of passengers is necessary. There are just too many crazies out there who are too inept to jump the hurdle of a TSA screening but would happily perform some insane act in the absence of such screening.

The question -- for me at least -- is why is the TSA so stupid and ineffective? Why can't they train workers to apply a modicum of common sense to their screenings? It doesn't make a system more failure-prone if the screeners are empowered and trained to be sensible about what they're doing -- quite the reverse. So why are TSA screeners (or enough of them anyway) brainless trogs?

I've got one reason: no union. If TSA screeners were protected by a union, they would attract a much higher quality of applicant; they could demand training, procedures, and working conditions that would avoid the travesty of a 3-year-old being groped; and there would be a grievance procedure in place that could raise legitimate concerns to management in a way that couldn't be ignored.

But nooooo. Giving TSA workers the dignity of union representation would be too expensive. Besides, they'd get "uppity." And we can't have that.

Please, let's put the blame where it belongs: on the hysterical post-9/11 nellies who created the TSA as a lowest-common-denominator employer, and subsequent administrations that have allowed it to remain that way.

[underpants]

5. They don't. A caller on Rush today pretty much laid it out

the observers are remote from seeing who walks in the scanner. They aren't saved they can't be. These images are BS most probably.

This was the topic of choice on RW radio from what I heard today...hey what can I say it amuses me.

[harun]

9. Of course they can be saved, are you really citing a caller on Rush as your

source of truth? Without a sarcasm tag?

Laughable.

[underpants]

12. No the guy claimed to be a TSA worker and he completely took apart Rush's rant to that point

Rush didn't know what to do with him.

[grahamhgreen]

18. Anything digital can be saved. A military intel guy told me that. If they have stuff that really

needs to be secure, they never put it in a computer.

[sabrina 1]

25. A TSA Worker? Lol, NOW I'm convinced.

How gullible can people be? No wonder this government abuses the people the way they do and gets away with it.

Maybe you should start doing some research on real people who have experienced the abuse of this agency. Even in their training, these 'scans' were abused, eg one man's scan used to send around the 'office' to make fun of how 'small' he was. A woman employee, also abused during the training process has filed suit and scores of passengers report abuse and are joining the effort to have these grotesque machines removed and disposed of.

Women AND men have reported being groped by TSA workers when they opted out of the machine scan and it is now pretty common knowledge that the 'enhanced patdown' is meant to be as abusive as possible in order to 'punish' people who refuse the body scan. If too many refuse to use them then the 'fear profiteers' won't make money. Michael Chertoff eg.

There are going to be thousands of criminal as well as civil complaints against these tactics not to mention boycotts, some already started, of airline travel.

TSA has never caught a single terrorist. But they have harassed and abused millions of Americans for years mostly for money, it is certainly not about security. I think this time the outrage of so many people and growing every day, will not go away until this insanity stops.

[sabrina 1]

26. Wrong, instead of listening to 'Rush' and his callers, you

might want to do some real research on this. The OP eg, demonstrates what liars Homeland Security are, but then smart people never believed them anyhow, that those images would not be saved and used for nefarious purposes.

These scanners have been rejected time and time again by the American people.

RW radio is no place to get facts. I would think everyone here on DU would now that. The TSA is desperately trying to cover its rear-end now because of the growing anger and outrage of the American people at their totalitarian tactics. So naturally they are all over the place trying to stop the growing anger and outrage over their abuses.

This is all about money. They thought they could use 9/11 to sell millions of dollars worth of these machines. But the outrage over them began as soon as the public learned about them. So, finally they moved quickly to install them before people had a chance to stop them again.

And if people opt out of the scan, they are subjected to an abusive, criminal groping session by strangers as punishment for refusing to use the machines.

You want to live in a totalitarian state like this, be my guest, I hope it won't be this one as I sincerely hope that the American people will prevail and put a stop to this never-ending attempt to use the deaths of those people on 9/11 as an excuse to turn this country into a totalitarian state.

[sabrina 1]

3. Or your three year olds. And Napolitano is angry at citizens for

excercising their right to refuse this abuse. I hope the outrage translates into a French-like boycott of all airlines until they learn that the American people can and will draw a line in the sand as far as government abuse like this.

This really is a test. They have been trying to get these scanners, who many are profiting from, into use for years. But every time they were told that the people do not want them.

Aside from the invasion of privacy, they are dangerous because of their use of ionizing radiation:

http://wewontfly.com/

For your Health


Backscatter X-ray uses ionizing radiation, a known cumulative health hazard, to produce images of passengers’ bodies. Children, pregnant women, the elderly, and those with defective DNA repair mechanisms are considered to be especially susceptible to the type of DNA damage caused by ionizing radiation. Also at high risk are those who have had, or currently have, skin cancer. Ionizing radiation’s effects are cumulative, meaning that each time you are exposed you are adding to your risk of developing cancer. Since the dosage of radiation from the backscatter X-ray machines is absorbed almost entirely by the skin and tissue directly under the skin, averaging the dose over the whole body gives an inaccurate picture of the actual harm. In their letter of concern, the UCSF faculty members noted that “the dose to the skin could be dangerously high”. The eyes are particularly susceptible to the effects of radiation, and as one study found allowing the eyes to be exposed to radiation can lead to an increased incidence of cataracts.

This is the New World Order. They are treating ordinary people like criminals, and it is NOT for security reasons. The Security Business has been ghoulishly profitable for the likes of Giuliani and Chertoff who is involved with these scanners. And that is why they are forcing the use of them.

Let's organize a Boston Body Scanner Party. The Boston Tea Party was for no less egregious government oppression than we are currently experiencing.

[suzanner]

6. No one mentions the health risks.

I wonder if a person can get a doctor's excuse to not be scanned.

http://blogs.findlaw.com/injured/

[KansDem]

10. Sure, but then you get groped.

Opt for no scan...they will "feel you up."



http://shops.cafepress.com/Shop/Show/tsagetoffgeton#

[BlueJac]

7. they can look at my brown eye.......

take a pic and put it in their wallets

[Politicalboi]

8. See 9/11 is

EVERYDAY. This is what we get for not paying attention and fighting for a new investigation. This is total bullshit.

[Xipe Totec]

11. No sex threads! nt

[humbled_opinion]

13. I wonder if one could get in trouble

by going through the scanner while aroused if you get my meaning?

[HysteryDiagnosis]

14. Imagine what would happen if 1,000,000 persons brought plastic

squirt guns on their persons when going to the airport. Just what would they do with all those people now? There is more than one way to protest something.

[grahamhgreen]

15. If you are a celebrity or a politician, your junk will wind up all over the internet.

Guaranteed.

[TheEuclideanOne]

19. Exactly and they won't be these blurry images.

Maybe today the images are blurry, but as the technology improves so do the images. Start small and make these legal, showing people blurred images where you can not make anything out and once they are made mainstream there will be no way to stop the better ones from getting in. Today, though, just show these grainy images that don't scare most people then ride the slippery slope.

[Can of Whoop-ass]

16. Bush & Cheney's Bodyscans

[grahamhgreen]

17. ROFL! Disgusting!!!!

[Omnibus]

22. With apologies to Burma Shave.

Portly guys in suits and ties
Make it hard to empathize
But lovely girls with ample charms
Will have supporters up in arms.

[Enrique]

28. that's hot n/t

[seabeyond]

29. question. with an airport the argument is, we dont haev right to fly. dont like. dont fly

with a court house, we dont have that option. if we have to use court house, it is not a choice. so that argument cannot be used. airport we say, no naked scanner, no groping.... no flying.

at court house we say no naked scanner, no groping, then jail because we didnt take care of business

[grahamhgreen]

30. "The right of the people to be secure in their persons,

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated"

That is our right. It includes airports.

Allowing pervs to feel up our kids will not make us safer. I'm sure they are flooding the TSA with applications as we speak.