Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Bloomberg)   "Naked" body scanners to be removed from airports, transferred to other government agencies. Have fun taking your kids to the Smithsonian museums, suckers   (bloomberg.com) divider line 130
    More: Interesting, Osi, U.S., U.S. Transportation Security Administration, underwear bomber, L-3 Communications, Electronic Privacy Information Center, Waters, airports  
•       •       •

9256 clicks; posted to Main » on 18 Jan 2013 at 9:52 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



130 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-01-18 09:20:12 AM  
Arms over your head, feet apart, don't move, hold that position for 10 seconds.
 
2013-01-18 09:57:30 AM  
Man... and here I wanted an excuse to opt-out so I could get me a back room pat down.
 
2013-01-18 09:57:31 AM  
It's cuz they finally got pictures of my junk....the only reason they put 'em up in the first place.
 
2013-01-18 09:58:29 AM  
I always find it amusing that the software was called "Rapiscan."

img.photobucket.com
 
2013-01-18 09:59:34 AM  
I knew all my refusals to go in one and instead get the pat down would result in them going under! *raises mighty fist*

TFA: The TSA will instead use 60 machines manufactured by L-3 Communications Holdings Inc. (LLL), the agency's other supplier of body scanners.

...wait what

*uncertain as to whether or not should slump and slink away*
 
2013-01-18 10:01:02 AM  

Liese: I knew all my refusals to go in one and instead get the pat down would result in them going under! *raises mighty fist*

TFA: The TSA will instead use 60 machines manufactured by L-3 Communications Holdings Inc. (LLL), the agency's other supplier of body scanners.

...wait what

*uncertain as to whether or not should slump and slink away*


It's my understanding that these are non-ionizing millimeter wave scanners, as opposed to ionizing backscatter scanners, so this is a significant improvement.

The risk from backscatter was always low, but apparently higher than the risk of actual terrorism.
 
2013-01-18 10:08:12 AM  

freewill: Liese: I knew all my refusals to go in one and instead get the pat down would result in them going under! *raises mighty fist*

TFA: The TSA will instead use 60 machines manufactured by L-3 Communications Holdings Inc. (LLL), the agency's other supplier of body scanners.

...wait what

*uncertain as to whether or not should slump and slink away*

It's my understanding that these are non-ionizing millimeter wave scanners, as opposed to ionizing backscatter scanners, so this is a significant improvement.

The risk from backscatter was always low, but apparently higher than the risk of actual terrorism.


Ok, has anyone tested these at all? Because fark you, TSA. I still won't go though them.
 
2013-01-18 10:10:33 AM  

freewill: It's my understanding that these are non-ionizing millimeter wave scanners, as opposed to ionizing backscatter scanners, so this is a significant improvement.

The risk from backscatter was always low, but apparently higher than the risk of actual terrorism.


I always opted out because I figured between flying across the Pacific multiple times a year and whatnot, I didn't need any extra help with regard to the cancer risk. Most TSA officials are pretty laid back about the pat down and just hurry to get it over with, but every so often you run into a dick cheese.
 
2013-01-18 10:11:18 AM  

Generation_D: Arms over your head, feet apart, don't move, hold that position for 10 seconds.


I like to pretend I'm making moose antlers when I do this. If rapiscan is inevitable, it's best to just try to enjoy it.
 
2013-01-18 10:11:57 AM  

ha-ha-guy: every so often you run into a dick cheese.


That's a pretty invasive pat-down.
 
2013-01-18 10:13:15 AM  

what_now: Ok, has anyone tested these at all? Because fark you, TSA. I still won't go though them.


This falls more under the category of "general physics". My understanding is that ionizing radiation can fark up your atoms and thereby your DNA, while non-ionizing radiation can't, because, well, that's why it's called that. It doesn't have the energy it needs to knock electrons off your atoms and create ions.

That said, in my decidedly non-expert opinion, the whole body scanner thing is idiotic to begin with and should die. I'm yet to see a compelling argument that this is vital to security, as opposed to a huge boondoggle for manufacturers.
 
2013-01-18 10:13:59 AM  

what_now: Ok, has anyone tested these at all? Because fark you, TSA. I still won't go though them.


I feel the same way. I'm not so sure they are safe, because I can't seem to find anything saying they are ok other than quotes from people associated with the machines. I haven't looked in a while, I just kinda gave up and decided to be steadfast in my refusal.

Besides, I kinda like it when the TSA agent says "I'm going to touch your breasts..." hurrrr.
 
2013-01-18 10:14:02 AM  
Damn. And xray-esque images of dicks and tittles is my favorite porn.
 
2013-01-18 10:14:43 AM  
I can't believe the TSA bungled this technology so badly. Just buy the exact same scanners Amsterdam's Schiphol uses. The screen displaying the image is right where you can see it and it shows a default human like blob instead of your actual image.

s3.jrnl.ie


You know what I take it back I can believe the TSA messed it up.
 
2013-01-18 10:15:27 AM  

freewill: a compelling argument that this is vital to security


b-b-b-but underwears bomber~!!
 
2013-01-18 10:16:02 AM  
The agency plans to expand the PreCheck program, in which passengers share personal data before going to the airport in exchange for less-invasive screening that lets them keep their belts and shoes on. I go thru PreCheck and still have to take my belt off because it sets off the metal detector. Nice to leave shoes on though. Plus there's no line at the PreCheck security station since not many people know about it. That alone is worth the price.
 
2013-01-18 10:18:15 AM  

ha-ha-guy: I always opted out because I figured between flying across the Pacific multiple times a year and whatnot, I didn't need any extra help with regard to the cancer risk.


Agreed. One time, in IAH when I opted out, this agent (not the one that patted me down, but a female) said as she was walking by, kinda flippantly, "Well sure you already have laptops and cell phones and other things contributing, why not get in a quick scanner?"

Wasn't sure if she was being snarky or not.
 
2013-01-18 10:19:10 AM  

Carth: I can't believe the TSA bungled this technology so badly. Just buy the exact same scanners Amsterdam's Schiphol uses. The screen displaying the image is right where you can see it and it shows a default human like blob instead of your actual image.

[s3.jrnl.ie image 390x285]


You know what I take it back I can believe the TSA messed it up.


I've been thru these at airports in the USA. The screens are available for passengers to see and they give a lot of false positives. I watched person after person go thru while the cartoon showed a giant box on top their heads, on their bare arms, etc. Basically everyone had to be patted down after going thru them because the machines said they had something on them that obviously wasn't there. Then again the same thing happens with the naked scanners, we just don't see the screens. I've been patted down after going thru those too.
 
2013-01-18 10:20:57 AM  

Walker: Carth: I can't believe the TSA bungled this technology so badly. Just buy the exact same scanners Amsterdam's Schiphol uses. The screen displaying the image is right where you can see it and it shows a default human like blob instead of your actual image.

[s3.jrnl.ie image 390x285]


You know what I take it back I can believe the TSA messed it up.

I've been thru these at airports in the USA. The screens are available for passengers to see and they give a lot of false positives. I watched person after person go thru while the cartoon showed a giant box on top their heads, on their bare arms, etc. Basically everyone had to be patted down after going thru them because the machines said they had something on them that obviously wasn't there. Then again the same thing happens with the naked scanners, we just don't see the screens. I've been patted down after going thru those too.


Maybe they are different scanners. I flew through Amsterdam and Dublin a few dozen times and only saw one or two false positives. They also only use those instead of metal detectors and don't scan you until you are at the gate which is nice.
 
2013-01-18 10:21:11 AM  
I've never actually seen these ever used. Every time I ever go to DFW, they are turned off and not being used.
 
2013-01-18 10:22:42 AM  
Time to fap to sexy TSA official Susan Hallowell one more time. Flash it Suz!
2.bp.blogspot.comwww.microwaves101.com
 
2013-01-18 10:26:22 AM  
"It became clear to TSA they would be unable to meet our timeline," Waters said. "As a result of that, we terminated the contract for the convenience of the government."

What a passive aggressive self aggrandizing asshole.
 
2013-01-18 10:28:54 AM  
The TSA has killed more people than the terrorists ever will.

By their own article 131 million people used the scanners if 1 in a million or 1 in 10 million got cancer, well they kill 131 or 13 people last year respectively.

Lets not forget the people who refuse to fly now and drive and get into accidents causing hundreds of additional deaths.

We'd be better off with no security at all now and let the passengers handle now that the sheep mentality is gone. We need to stop relying on some government agency to protect us and go back to doing it ourselves.
 
2013-01-18 10:29:11 AM  
Rapiscan...

Just wow on the name... seriously guys they weren't even trying when they trolled that one.
 
2013-01-18 10:30:08 AM  
Well, all righty then. I always opted out. I'm not doing a naked scan just because people need security theatre. Every time I got the pat-down the TSA blueshirts were professional about it, and I'm not gonna be a dick to a guy just doing his job.

I know the blueshirts get a lot of crap, and sometimes rightfully so, but they're basically low-scale actors in the giant clownshow that is the Department of Homeland Security. They don't get paid enough to put up with some of the bullshiat that's flowed down the pipe.
 
2013-01-18 10:31:52 AM  
1.bp.blogspot.com

I have never been through one of these. I "opt out" when I fly. I love making a scene about it too.
There is no way to generate an image like that without using high frequency radio waves (I am a wireless radio engineer, I know wtf I'm talking about).
High freq waves are damn good at causing cancer, the scanner is about the equivalent of standing under a cell tower for 8 hours or so.


Do you have kids? Do you want those thugs at airport security looking at your underage daughters naked body? Because they are...
 
2013-01-18 10:33:50 AM  

theorellior: Well, all righty then. I always opted out. I'm not doing a naked scan just because people need security theatre. Every time I got the pat-down the TSA blueshirts were professional about it, and I'm not gonna be a dick to a guy just doing his job.

I know the blueshirts get a lot of crap, and sometimes rightfully so, but they're basically low-scale actors in the giant clownshow that is the Department of Homeland Security. They don't get paid enough to put up with some of the bullshiat that's flowed down the pipe.


I get a mixed bag, but overall, the customs guy checking my passport is almost always a major league dick while the TSA guy is usually pretty OK. (Customs at Philadelphia makes me feel like I'm not welcome in my own country.)

I do recall that the screeners in Italy were super professional and super friendly at multiple airports, and good lord, the female screeners were so hot and even flirtatious.
 
2013-01-18 10:38:00 AM  

HartRend: [1.bp.blogspot.com image 465x349]

I have never been through one of these. I "opt out" when I fly. I love making a scene about it too.
There is no way to generate an image like that without using high frequency radio waves (I am a wireless radio engineer, I know wtf I'm talking about).
High freq waves are damn good at causing cancer, the scanner is about the equivalent of standing under a cell tower for 8 hours or so.


Do you have kids? Do you want those thugs at airport security looking at your underage daughters naked body? Because they are...


That image is a photoshop though not an actual picture from one of the scanners.
 
2013-01-18 10:38:30 AM  

Carth: I can't believe the TSA bungled this technology so badly. Just buy the exact same scanners Amsterdam's Schiphol uses. The screen displaying the image is right where you can see it and it shows a default human like blob instead of your actual image.

[s3.jrnl.ie image 390x285]





fapfapfapfapfapfapfapfapfapfapfapfapfapfapfapfap
 
2013-01-18 10:38:33 AM  
Meh.

As someone who regularly flies for work, I just didn't see the outrage.

When the TSA patted me down no one ever grabbed my junk or demanded that I strip (heck, the pat down was less invasive than what I get when I go to an Eagles game where security does the whole body as opposed to just the part of the body the x-ray machine thinks you have something illicit).

If TSA agents were laughing at a nacked x-ray of me I really couldn't care. Heck, I think one of those photos would make a fun holiday card to send to family and friends.

As for the health risks, it's probably less dangerous than regularly breathing the air in cities like NYC and LA.

What would make more security sense and speed things up at airports is if tighter restrictions were placed on the size of bags allowed on planes like has been done for years at European airports (their x-ray machines have a much smaller opening -- if your bag doesn't fit they force you to check it, no debates).
 
2013-01-18 10:40:02 AM  

HartRend: [1.bp.blogspot.com image 465x349]

I have never been through one of these. I "opt out" when I fly. I love making a scene about it too.
There is no way to generate an image like that without using high frequency radio waves (I am a wireless radio engineer, I know wtf I'm talking about).
High freq waves are damn good at causing cancer, the scanner is about the equivalent of standing under a cell tower for 8 hours or so.


Do you have kids? Do you want those thugs at airport security looking at your underage daughters naked body? Because they are...


That particular image is fake. It's just a inverted professional nude model stock photo and photoshopped objects.

I'm actually fascinated that a contract was terminated for failing to deliver on actual software to produce less explicit images. I assumed all along that the cartoon images that would be shown in public would be nothing but PR bullshiat and security classification would be used to hide the actual use of unfiltered images in the back room. I thought the "software" would be a human being looking at a nude image and tapping the location of objects on their screen which would then make a dot appear on the cartoon image and that fact would be secret. I'm either impressed that the government is trying to really do what it said or that the coverup is so brilliant as to include a contractor firing as part of the cover story.
 
2013-01-18 10:41:25 AM  

Walker: I've been thru these at airports in the USA. The screens are available for passengers to see and they give a lot of false positives. I watched person after person go thru while the cartoon showed a giant box on top their heads, on their bare arms, etc. Basically everyone had to be patted down after going thru them because the machines said they had something on them that obviously wasn't there. Then again the same thing happens with the naked scanners, we just don't see the screens. I've been patted down after going thru those too.


Do you an erection would trigger it? Because if so, I have a hobby now.
 
2013-01-18 10:43:47 AM  

Carth: I can't believe the TSA bungled this technology so badly. Just buy the exact same scanners Amsterdam's Schiphol uses. The screen displaying the image is right where you can see it and it shows a default human like blob instead of your actual image.

[s3.jrnl.ie image 390x285]


You know what I take it back I can believe the TSA messed it up.


if there is not under the table money, kickbacks and someones politically connected Uncle making a farking bundle off it then it's not The American Way. one more reason to detest a country that blatantly ignores other countries existing technologies, even when it bites the American nose off the USA face.
 
2013-01-18 10:45:09 AM  

what_now: freewill: Liese: I knew all my refusals to go in one and instead get the pat down would result in them going under! *raises mighty fist*

TFA: The TSA will instead use 60 machines manufactured by L-3 Communications Holdings Inc. (LLL), the agency's other supplier of body scanners.

...wait what

*uncertain as to whether or not should slump and slink away*

It's my understanding that these are non-ionizing millimeter wave scanners, as opposed to ionizing backscatter scanners, so this is a significant improvement.

The risk from backscatter was always low, but apparently higher than the risk of actual terrorism.

Ok, has anyone tested these at all? Because fark you, TSA. I still won't go though them.


I have.  Quick and simple.  The image used by the machine is a "paper doll" that flashes a warning over a specific area when suspect items are detected (and everything is suspect).

Much more comfortable with RF scanners than X-Ray.  Family history of skin cancer.  PDX and McCarran (the only airports I care about) both use the L-3 machines.  Safe, quick, and reasonable.

We somehow managed to dodge the cancer-causing Rapiscan machines at San Antonio.  Went through metal detectors instead.  Weird thing was, it was based on which line you *chose* to stand in.  People flying through Houston had no choice - get irradiated or get Texased.

Fark Texas.  Never going back.

/only reason went in the first place was the F1 race
//had great seats
 
2013-01-18 10:45:49 AM  

freewill:
The risk from backscatter was always low, but apparently higher than the risk of actual terrorism.


The risk of virtually anything you can imagine is higher than the risk of actual terrorism.
 
2013-01-18 10:47:39 AM  

Carth: HartRend: [1.bp.blogspot.com image 465x349]

I have never been through one of these. I "opt out" when I fly. I love making a scene about it too.
There is no way to generate an image like that without using high frequency radio waves (I am a wireless radio engineer, I know wtf I'm talking about).
High freq waves are damn good at causing cancer, the scanner is about the equivalent of standing under a cell tower for 8 hours or so.


Do you have kids? Do you want those thugs at airport security looking at your underage daughters naked body? Because they are...

That image is a photoshop though not an actual picture from one of the scanners.


Sure are a lot of shops out there:

static.guim.co.uk
seeker401.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-01-18 10:47:44 AM  
Yeah except you actually don't have to go through any security to go to the Smithsonian Museums, they do check your bag, presumbly to see if you are hiding a chisel or a can of spray paint of something, but that's it
 
2013-01-18 10:48:24 AM  
Scanners to be replaced by sketch artists. They will draw what they think you look like naked.

In other news. Floors to be more squeaky clean than ever before.
 
2013-01-18 10:49:07 AM  

what_now: Ok, has anyone tested these at all? Because fark you, TSA. I still won't go though them.


Yeah as long as they waste my time I'm going to do my best to waste theirs and make the dropout feel a little uncomfortable.

//fark airports
 
2013-01-18 10:49:54 AM  
I am glad that they are being removed, but it is not for the right reason... Pretty sad that it took a technical problem to get this crap undone, and they will probably try to reintroduce newer models in the future.
 
2013-01-18 10:50:12 AM  

Magorn: Yeah except you actually don't have to go through any security to go to the Smithsonian Museums, they do check your bag, presumbly to see if you are hiding a chisel or a can of spray paint of something, but that's it


You do have to pass a strenuous fatty test - walking from the train station to fonzie's jacket.

//national gallery is the best
 
2013-01-18 10:51:36 AM  

freewill: Do you an erection would trigger it? Because if so, I have a hobby now.


If you have an erection, does that show up on the scanner? Because if so, I think forcing the TSA goons to look at my boner would please me. Some perspective for you: For a time in my youth I spent three months incarcerated in a US Army stockade for a dumb drug offense. One policy was that if you left the facility for any reason you had to be strip-searched upon return. Part of the search is the "turn around, bend at the waste, and spread your ass-cheeks that the guard (usually an E3 or E4) could see you were not concealing any contraband there. Now, some of the other prisoners found this extremely degrading and humiliating. I challenged them, though, to consider which is worse: to assume the pose or to be required to look at your rancid asshole. YES! Hey Sergeant, fark YOU, AND LOOK INTO MY EYE!

That made the whole thing a little easier to endure.
 
2013-01-18 10:51:46 AM  

moothemagiccow: what_now: Ok, has anyone tested these at all? Because fark you, TSA. I still won't go though them.

Yeah as long as they waste my time I'm going to do my best to waste theirs and make the dropout feel a little uncomfortable.

//fark airports


I have a relative in the TSA, I got her a radiation badge from my wife who works at the hospital around x-ray machines.
The TSA "director" at her location would not allow her to monitor the radiation levels she was exposed to.
Walks like a duck... and quack quack... do the math.
 
2013-01-18 10:51:53 AM  

HartRend: Carth: HartRend: [1.bp.blogspot.com image 465x349]

I have never been through one of these. I "opt out" when I fly. I love making a scene about it too.
There is no way to generate an image like that without using high frequency radio waves (I am a wireless radio engineer, I know wtf I'm talking about).
High freq waves are damn good at causing cancer, the scanner is about the equivalent of standing under a cell tower for 8 hours or so.


Do you have kids? Do you want those thugs at airport security looking at your underage daughters naked body? Because they are...

That image is a photoshop though not an actual picture from one of the scanners.

Sure are a lot of shops out there:

[static.guim.co.uk image 460x276]
[seeker401.files.wordpress.com image 400x299]


Those are real. Notice the scanners don't show hair.
 
2013-01-18 10:53:26 AM  

AngryJailhouseFistfark: YES! Hey Sergeant, fark YOU, AND LOOK INTO MY EYE!

That made the whole thing a little easier to endure.


Just wiggle it a little when you know they're looking.
 
2013-01-18 10:55:03 AM  

theorellior: Well, all righty then. I always opted out. I'm not doing a naked scan just because people need security theatre. Every time I got the pat-down the TSA blueshirts were professional about it, and I'm not gonna be a dick to a guy just doing his job.

I know the blueshirts get a lot of crap, and sometimes rightfully so, but they're basically low-scale actors in the giant clownshow that is the Department of Homeland Security. They don't get paid enough to put up with some of the bullshiat that's flowed down the pipe.


I completely concur.
 
2013-01-18 10:56:03 AM  
Those are real. Notice the scanners don't show hair.

Everybody manscapes these days.
 
2013-01-18 10:57:36 AM  

Walker: The agency plans to expand the PreCheck program, in which passengers share personal data before going to the airport in exchange for less-invasive screening that lets them keep their belts and shoes on. I go thru PreCheck and still have to take my belt off because it sets off the metal detector. Nice to leave shoes on though. Plus there's no line at the PreCheck security station since not many people know about it. That alone is worth the price.


I just got my GOES/Pre-Check pass. I'm signing my kids up, too. It's worth the $20/year ($100, good for 5 years) to get it.
 
2013-01-18 10:59:34 AM  

Kuroshin: People flying through Houston had no choice - get irradiated or get Texased.


wat

I go through IAH on my return trip, and to get patted down I don't even go through a metal detector--which I think is kind of weird. They just have me step through a half-gate and then they pat me down. I got a choice. ;)
 
2013-01-18 11:00:46 AM  

kokomo61: Walker: The agency plans to expand the PreCheck program, in which passengers share personal data before going to the airport in exchange for less-invasive screening that lets them keep their belts and shoes on. I go thru PreCheck and still have to take my belt off because it sets off the metal detector. Nice to leave shoes on though. Plus there's no line at the PreCheck security station since not many people know about it. That alone is worth the price.

I just got my GOES/Pre-Check pass. I'm signing my kids up, too. It's worth the $20/year ($100, good for 5 years) to get it.


prairiefirenews.com

Papers... Papers Please...
 
2013-01-18 11:01:10 AM  

what_now: Ok, has anyone tested these at all? Because fark you, TSA. I still won't go though them.


Test for what? Microwave radio energy *by definition* isn't ionizing.
 
2013-01-18 11:01:16 AM  
TSA will end a $5 million contract with OSI's Rapiscan

Was it intentional that their name so closely resembles "Rapescan"?
 
2013-01-18 11:01:45 AM  

theorellior: Well, all righty then. I always opted out. I'm not doing a naked scan just because people need security theatre. Every time I got the pat-down the TSA blueshirts were professional about it, and I'm not gonna be a dick to a guy just doing his job.

I know the blueshirts get a lot of crap, and sometimes rightfully so, but they're basically low-scale actors in the giant clownshow that is the Department of Homeland Security. They don't get paid enough to put up with some of the bullshiat that's flowed down the pipe.


screw that. He signed up to be employed in security theater and brush peoples crotches, fark him. Every single last TSA agent deserves to be harassed as often as possible. It is a profession that deserves no respect and we as a society are doing ourselves no favors by pretending to tolerate these dicks.
 
2013-01-18 11:02:59 AM  

Magorn: Yeah except you actually don't have to go through any security to go to the Smithsonian Museums, they do check your bag, presumbly to see if you are hiding a chisel or a can of spray paint of something, but that's it


Are Sharpies permitted? What about squirt guns and live squid?
 
2013-01-18 11:04:42 AM  

Maul555: theorellior: Well, all righty then. I always opted out. I'm not doing a naked scan just because people need security theatre. Every time I got the pat-down the TSA blueshirts were professional about it, and I'm not gonna be a dick to a guy just doing his job.

I know the blueshirts get a lot of crap, and sometimes rightfully so, but they're basically low-scale actors in the giant clownshow that is the Department of Homeland Security. They don't get paid enough to put up with some of the bullshiat that's flowed down the pipe.

screw that. He signed up to be employed in security theater and brush peoples crotches, fark him. Every single last TSA agent deserves to be harassed as often as possible. It is a profession that deserves no respect and we as a society are doing ourselves no favors by pretending to tolerate these dicks.


www.libertystickers.com
 
2013-01-18 11:06:57 AM  
disinfo.s3.amazonaws.com
 
2013-01-18 11:09:05 AM  

lohphat: what_now: Ok, has anyone tested these at all? Because fark you, TSA. I still won't go though them.

Test for what? Microwave radio energy *by definition* isn't ionizing.


ionization is not the only factor in regard to cancer
 
2013-01-18 11:09:20 AM  

lohphat: what_now: Ok, has anyone tested these at all? Because fark you, TSA. I still won't go though them.

Test for what? Microwave radio energy *by definition* isn't ionizing.


Yeah, here's the thing: I don't know what that means. I work in finance, not science. I trust the TSA about as much as they trust me: not at all.

This is security theater. That's all it is. It makes stupid people feel safer, it's a major jobs program for the less than bright among us, and it's a huge boon to the makers of these machines- one of whom just HAPPENS to be a former Secretary of Homeland Security.

Yeah. I feel sfer.
 
2013-01-18 11:09:36 AM  

HartRend: [1.bp.blogspot.com image 465x349]

I have never been through one of these. I "opt out" when I fly. I love making a scene about it too.
There is no way to generate an image like that without using high frequency radio waves (I am a wireless radio engineer, I know wtf I'm talking about).
High freq waves are damn good at causing cancer, the scanner is about the equivalent of standing under a cell tower for 8 hours or so.


High frequency waves do cause cancer, but only the ones that are orders of magnitude higher in energy than the ones you are talking about.
 
2013-01-18 11:10:20 AM  

Walker: Carth: I can't believe the TSA bungled this technology so badly. Just buy the exact same scanners Amsterdam's Schiphol uses. The screen displaying the image is right where you can see it and it shows a default human like blob instead of your actual image.

[s3.jrnl.ie image 390x285]


You know what I take it back I can believe the TSA messed it up.

I've been thru these at airports in the USA. The screens are available for passengers to see and they give a lot of false positives. I watched person after person go thru while the cartoon showed a giant box on top their heads, on their bare arms, etc. Basically everyone had to be patted down after going thru them because the machines said they had something on them that obviously wasn't there. Then again the same thing happens with the naked scanners, we just don't see the screens. I've been patted down after going thru those too.


I travel at least twice a month and those stupid screeners always show something on either my left knee or left arm.  I don't have anything there--no braces, pins, or anything.  Doesn't matter if I'm wearing a skirt, shorts, or short sleeves, either.  I still manage to set it off somehow.

Also, if you're wearing a long skirt or dress, the TSA either requires you to go through the scanner or get a pat down.  No metal detectors allowed for long skirts.  I'll never understand that.  But then, it *is* the TSA.
 
2013-01-18 11:11:57 AM  

OrangeSnapper: HartRend: [1.bp.blogspot.com image 465x349]

I have never been through one of these. I "opt out" when I fly. I love making a scene about it too.
There is no way to generate an image like that without using high frequency radio waves (I am a wireless radio engineer, I know wtf I'm talking about).
High freq waves are damn good at causing cancer, the scanner is about the equivalent of standing under a cell tower for 8 hours or so.


High frequency waves do cause cancer, but only the ones that are orders of magnitude higher in energy than the ones you are talking about.


Considering nobody has funded an independent third party study in regard to these machines, I'm going to call bullshiat on your part, you don't know, nor do I.
 
2013-01-18 11:13:43 AM  

thornhill: Meh.

As someone who regularly flies for work, I just didn't see the outrage.


I don't fly much, but the trouble I personally have is that it's expensive, inconvenient, and doesn't actually make us any safer.

A 9/11-style attack can't succeed anymore, now that we know a hijacker might try to kamikaze the plane. Flight 93 shows that. Between that knowledge, and locked/reinforced cockpit doors, it's covered.

If we reverted airport security to pre-9/11 practices, and spent the money instead on undercover agents, intelligence analysis, emergency response and the like, we could actually be safer. (E.g. infiltrate every militia group that's not already infiltrated).
 
2013-01-18 11:14:19 AM  
Spare parts for 25 years. Who cares if it worked or not?
 
2013-01-18 11:14:52 AM  

Carth: I can't believe the TSA bungled this technology so badly. Just buy the exact same scanners Amsterdam's Schiphol uses. The screen displaying the image is right where you can see it and it shows a default human like blob instead of your actual image.

[s3.jrnl.ie image 390x285]


You know what I take it back I can believe the TSA messed it up.


I was based out of Schiphol for the last 3 years. My casual observation showed them showing about half false-positives. This is the reason that the Germans and Italians declines to buy these machines. The political pressure on the Dutch was higher since they let that guy who set his pants on fire through a few years back. Not that these machines would have stopped that...
 
2013-01-18 11:15:15 AM  

Gaseous Anomaly: A 9/11-style attack can't succeed anymore, now that we know a hijacker might try to kamikaze the plane. Flight 93 shows that. Between that knowledge, and locked/reinforced cockpit doors, it's covered.


No of course not. The next terrorist attack will take place in the security line of LAX or Atlanta.
 
2013-01-18 11:18:39 AM  

HartRend: OrangeSnapper: HartRend: [1.bp.blogspot.com image 465x349]

I have never been through one of these. I "opt out" when I fly. I love making a scene about it too.
There is no way to generate an image like that without using high frequency radio waves (I am a wireless radio engineer, I know wtf I'm talking about).
High freq waves are damn good at causing cancer, the scanner is about the equivalent of standing under a cell tower for 8 hours or so.


High frequency waves do cause cancer, but only the ones that are orders of magnitude higher in energy than the ones you are talking about.

Considering nobody has funded an independent third party study in regard to these machines, I'm going to call bullshiat on your part, you don't know, nor do I.


I was trying to be polite, but do you know how I know you don't know wtf you are talking about?
 
2013-01-18 11:20:50 AM  

what_now: Gaseous Anomaly: A 9/11-style attack can't succeed anymore, now that we know a hijacker might try to kamikaze the plane. Flight 93 shows that. Between that knowledge, and locked/reinforced cockpit doors, it's covered.

No of course not. The next terrorist attack will take place in the security line of LAX or Atlanta.


The truth is we are all pretending that if we legislate, enforce, and condemn enough actions, that the evil people on earth will stop bothering the good guys.
The truth is, we are all always vulnerable to "terrorist" (AKA EVIL) actions. They won the moment we dumped billions in to security, instead of feeding our homeless, or helping the needy with that money.

America's selfish, self centered, narcissistic reaction to 9/11 has done more to give the enemy the advantage than any possible action the enemy could have taken on their own.
We lost people, it's time to fix this shiat.
 
2013-01-18 11:21:42 AM  

OrangeSnapper: HartRend: OrangeSnapper: HartRend: [1.bp.blogspot.com image 465x349]

I have never been through one of these. I "opt out" when I fly. I love making a scene about it too.
There is no way to generate an image like that without using high frequency radio waves (I am a wireless radio engineer, I know wtf I'm talking about).
High freq waves are damn good at causing cancer, the scanner is about the equivalent of standing under a cell tower for 8 hours or so.


High frequency waves do cause cancer, but only the ones that are orders of magnitude higher in energy than the ones you are talking about.

Considering nobody has funded an independent third party study in regard to these machines, I'm going to call bullshiat on your part, you don't know, nor do I.

I was trying to be polite, but do you know how I know you don't know wtf you are talking about?


No I don't, because you don't, because I do know what I'm talking about. Thanks what I know.
 
2013-01-18 11:23:59 AM  
this whole system is a crock of shiat. When I took my kids to Disney last summer, they pulled my wife and kids off to the side and escorted them right through then pulled me for one of these b.s. scans. I asked how much sense it makes to assume I would carry contraband on my own person while my wife and kids are automatically deemed to be innocent. I was told they were following procedures, to which I said your procedures make no sense. The best part of this entire sham is that if they do find a bottle of shampoo, pocket knife, etc - they put it in a big container that they then stand next to all day while shaking down everyone else coming through. The largest bottle neck in an airport is the security checkpoint. If they are so concerned your grandma's fruitcake is a bomb, why do they put it in a bin right next to a place where hundreds of people will congregate all day while waiting to be felt-up? What's even better, is that it is then sorted and sold to make a few bucks. If they are confiscating items that are bombs, wouldn't it make more sense to dispose of them as if they were bombs rather than sell them in a gift shop? They know your bottle of water is safe, they know your shampoo is soap, they know your ugly-assed eagle figurine with a 3" sword in the talons is just a nick-knack, they know your snow globe that says "I got blown in Cancun" isn't sarin gas. The whole system is a dog and pony show that nets billions of dollars - and that's what it's all about.
 
2013-01-18 11:26:59 AM  

Gaseous Anomaly: thornhill: Meh.

As someone who regularly flies for work, I just didn't see the outrage.

I don't fly much, but the trouble I personally have is that it's expensive, inconvenient, and doesn't actually make us any safer.

A 9/11-style attack can't succeed anymore, now that we know a hijacker might try to kamikaze the plane. Flight 93 shows that. Between that knowledge, and locked/reinforced cockpit doors, it's covered.

If we reverted airport security to pre-9/11 practices, and spent the money instead on undercover agents, intelligence analysis, emergency response and the like, we could actually be safer. (E.g. infiltrate every militia group that's not already infiltrated).


This thing with airport security, and security in general, it's that it's largely a deterrent, and there is no way to really know how effective it is. For all we know, the terrorists may have scrapped plans related to airplanes because they felt the new security measurers would increase the likelihood of their plan being stopped.

Now that's not to say there are not more cost effective things TSA could be doing, but I wouldn't be so quick to outright dismiss the current procedures.

And this also isn't to say that the government is infallible, but it's kinda hard for us to be arm chair security experts when we don't have access to any intelligence reports. TSA/DHS knows how much everyone hates the 3oz rule. It seems more likely that they have a good reason for maintaining it rather than just wanting to be vindictive against air travelers.
 
2013-01-18 11:27:44 AM  

HartRend: They won the moment we dumped billions in to security, instead of feeding our homeless, or helping the needy with that money.


Yup. This is absolutely accurate. Everyone's gonna die sometime, lets stop worrying about the possibility of terrorism, and start focusing on the actual problem of poverty.
 
2013-01-18 11:30:22 AM  

i upped my meds-up yours: Time to fap to sexy TSA official Susan Hallowell one more time. Flash it Suz!
[2.bp.blogspot.com image 200x308][www.microwaves101.com image 400x331]


I've always thought that picture was key to this whole argument. It's the only one that was ever released, and it can tell us much. For example, if that had been a guy, we would know if he was circumcised or not. The detail is incredible - and Very revealing. But much lesser known is this: she's carrying two guns - not one. That technology has a very hard time picking up guns and weapons on peoples sides - it needs the body as a back ground. If you look very closely, you can tell she has a second gun on her hip (where most people carry them anyway). This failure of the technology explains how Adam Savage (yes, of Mythbusters) was able to carry huge metal knives for a foam cutting tool through the airport - they were on his side and therefore invisible to the scanner.

So, we had a tool that was incredibly invasive, yet demonstrably bad at it's stated job. Good riddance.
 
2013-01-18 11:30:47 AM  

HartRend: OrangeSnapper: HartRend: OrangeSnapper: HartRend: [1.bp.blogspot.com image 465x349]

I have never been through one of these. I "opt out" when I fly. I love making a scene about it too.
There is no way to generate an image like that without using high frequency radio waves (I am a wireless radio engineer, I know wtf I'm talking about).
High freq waves are damn good at causing cancer, the scanner is about the equivalent of standing under a cell tower for 8 hours or so.


High frequency waves do cause cancer, but only the ones that are orders of magnitude higher in energy than the ones you are talking about.

Considering nobody has funded an independent third party study in regard to these machines, I'm going to call bullshiat on your part, you don't know, nor do I.

I was trying to be polite, but do you know how I know you don't know wtf you are talking about?

No I don't, because you don't, because I do know what I'm talking about. Thanks what I know.


Aah, Engineers, the oompa loompas of science. This should be a good read, for starters. But since you know what you are talking about, we await your lecture us on how radio waves cause cancer. Perhaps you could follow up on how they are used for mind control as well. There's just as much evidence for that, and the physical mechanism is just as well established.
 
2013-01-18 11:32:36 AM  

HartRend: www.libertystickers.com


Yes, comparing a TSA blueshirt patting you down to rounding up Jews to be roasted alive isn't hyperbolic at all.
 
2013-01-18 11:33:17 AM  

OrangeSnapper: HartRend: OrangeSnapper: HartRend: OrangeSnapper: HartRend: [1.bp.blogspot.com image 465x349]

I have never been through one of these. I "opt out" when I fly. I love making a scene about it too.
There is no way to generate an image like that without using high frequency radio waves (I am a wireless radio engineer, I know wtf I'm talking about).
High freq waves are damn good at causing cancer, the scanner is about the equivalent of standing under a cell tower for 8 hours or so.


High frequency waves do cause cancer, but only the ones that are orders of magnitude higher in energy than the ones you are talking about.

Considering nobody has funded an independent third party study in regard to these machines, I'm going to call bullshiat on your part, you don't know, nor do I.

I was trying to be polite, but do you know how I know you don't know wtf you are talking about?

No I don't, because you don't, because I do know what I'm talking about. Thanks what I know.

Aah, Engineers, the oompa loompas of science. This should be a good read, for starters. But since you know what you are talking about, we await your lecture us on how radio waves cause cancer. Perhaps you could follow up on how they are used for mind control as well. There's just as much evidence for that, and the physical mechanism is just as well established.


If you don't' have anything intelligent to say, gtfo of this thread. So far everything has been diplomatic and constructive. If you have to insult your opponent because you can't out wit them, you have already lost.
 
2013-01-18 11:33:45 AM  
Small victories.

www.gallagher.com
 
2013-01-18 11:33:50 AM  

what_now: freewill: Liese: I knew all my refusals to go in one and instead get the pat down would result in them going under! *raises mighty fist*

TFA: The TSA will instead use 60 machines manufactured by L-3 Communications Holdings Inc. (LLL), the agency's other supplier of body scanners.

...wait what

*uncertain as to whether or not should slump and slink away*

It's my understanding that these are non-ionizing millimeter wave scanners, as opposed to ionizing backscatter scanners, so this is a significant improvement.

The risk from backscatter was always low, but apparently higher than the risk of actual terrorism.

Ok, has anyone tested these at all? Because fark you, TSA. I still won't go though them.


From what I understand, millimeter wave scanners use radio frequency rather than the xrays used in backscatter machines, and some (called passive) don't emit anything at all, just take readings based on ambient RF levels. Canada's been using millimeter wave scanners in some airports for 3 years. When we put them in instead of the Rapiscan technology, Rapiscan sued and the US government classified the Canadian purchase of equipment from another supplier as a "trade irritant" and lodged a formal complaint, so now that the US is dumping Rapiscan I'm getting a kick.

If Wikipedia is correct, some US airports already have the millimeter wave scanners (LAX, SFO, SLC, IND, DTW, MSP and LAS), as do the Jersey City PATH and the federal courthouse in Orlando, so if I were going to look for US specific safety/effectiveness data from a source other than the manufacturer, that's where I'd start.
 
2013-01-18 11:34:15 AM  

theorellior: HartRend: www.libertystickers.com

Yes, comparing a TSA blueshirt patting you down to rounding up Jews to be roasted alive isn't hyperbolic at all.


Then you are blind and don't see what is coming.
Once it is put in place, it never goes away.
Liberty is slowing being eroded, and the sand is being washed away from beneath your feet, and you don't even see it.
 
2013-01-18 11:34:54 AM  

HartRend: America's selfish, self centered, narcissistic reaction to 9/11 has done more to give the enemy the advantage than any possible action the enemy could have taken on their own.


Quoted for truth.
 
2013-01-18 11:36:47 AM  

HartRend: [1.bp.blogspot.com image 465x349]

I have never been through one of these. I "opt out" when I fly. I love making a scene about it too.
There is no way to generate an image like that without using high frequency radio waves (I am a wireless radio engineer, I know wtf I'm talking about).
High freq waves are damn good at causing cancer, the scanner is about the equivalent of standing under a cell tower for 8 hours or so.


Do you have kids? Do you want those thugs at airport security looking at your underage daughters naked body? Because they are...


So you're the dumbass holding up the line.   Always good for a laugh.  Its time to witness Citizen Poutrage, starring you.

The mall clerk with a tazer can't change the rules dumbfark, either write your congressman or don't fly.
 
2013-01-18 11:37:43 AM  

Generation_D: HartRend: [1.bp.blogspot.com image 465x349]

I have never been through one of these. I "opt out" when I fly. I love making a scene about it too.
There is no way to generate an image like that without using high frequency radio waves (I am a wireless radio engineer, I know wtf I'm talking about).
High freq waves are damn good at causing cancer, the scanner is about the equivalent of standing under a cell tower for 8 hours or so.


Do you have kids? Do you want those thugs at airport security looking at your underage daughters naked body? Because they are...

So you're the dumbass holding up the line.   Always good for a laugh.  Its time to witness Citizen Poutrage, starring you.

The mall clerk with a tazer can't change the rules dumbfark, either write your congressman or don't fly.


They take me out of the line, idiot.
 
2013-01-18 11:38:07 AM  

HartRend: Then you are blind and don't see what is coming.
Once it is put in place, it never goes away.
Liberty is slowing being eroded, and the sand is being washed away from beneath your feet, and you don't even see it.


Oh, I see it, I just don't think some poor slob from East Boston needs anything else done to him to make him feel like a shiathead. I reserve my ire for those who promulgate this asshattery on the populace. From the moment it was proposed I was dead-set against the Department of Homeland Security. You want Nazisms? the whole name, "Department of Homeland Security" sounds like something Goering dreamed up.
 
2013-01-18 11:40:45 AM  

Liese: ha-ha-guy: I always opted out because I figured between flying across the Pacific multiple times a year and whatnot, I didn't need any extra help with regard to the cancer risk.

Agreed. One time, in IAH when I opted out, this agent (not the one that patted me down, but a female) said as she was walking by, kinda flippantly, "Well sure you already have laptops and cell phones and other things contributing, why not get in a quick scanner?"

Wasn't sure if she was being snarky or not.


If she's working in the TSA Crotch Touching Division, odds are she doesn't grasp things like wave length or just because you're exposed to some risk factors means you should expose yourself to all of them.

What I've found is the nicer you dress, the lower the odds you have of trouble. Sport coat, my first class boarding pass visible, and perhaps something to mark me as ex military leads to much better treatment than the time I was in jeans and a hoodie. Just have to socially engineer your way through the checkpoint.
 
2013-01-18 11:42:31 AM  

theorellior: HartRend: Then you are blind and don't see what is coming.
Once it is put in place, it never goes away.
Liberty is slowing being eroded, and the sand is being washed away from beneath your feet, and you don't even see it.

Oh, I see it, I just don't think some poor slob from East Boston needs anything else done to him to make him feel like a shiathead. I reserve my ire for those who promulgate this asshattery on the populace. From the moment it was proposed I was dead-set against the Department of Homeland Security. You want Nazisms? the whole name, "Department of Homeland Security" sounds like something Goering dreamed up.


I agree with you for the most part, but I don't think we should tolerate this. The security personnel should go build roads, or something else constructive. If we are just going to spend tax dollars to create jobs, why make them jobs that are pointless. Why not use these resources to better our country, instead of ruining what used to be a worldly beacon of freedom.
 
2013-01-18 11:47:31 AM  

ha-ha-guy: Liese: ha-ha-guy: I always opted out because I figured between flying across the Pacific multiple times a year and whatnot, I didn't need any extra help with regard to the cancer risk.

Agreed. One time, in IAH when I opted out, this agent (not the one that patted me down, but a female) said as she was walking by, kinda flippantly, "Well sure you already have laptops and cell phones and other things contributing, why not get in a quick scanner?"

Wasn't sure if she was being snarky or not.

If she's working in the TSA Crotch Touching Division, odds are she doesn't grasp things like wave length or just because you're exposed to some risk factors means you should expose yourself to all of them.

What I've found is the nicer you dress, the lower the odds you have of trouble. Sport coat, my first class boarding pass visible, and perhaps something to mark me as ex military leads to much better treatment than the time I was in jeans and a hoodie. Just have to socially engineer your way through the checkpoint.


Ex Mil? Why do good people like you, who fought for our freedom, have to come home and be persecuted on domestic soil. Why do you have to socially engineer your way through the airport. Why don't we roll out the red carpet. It's a damn shame. They told us we were fighting for our families and our rights. After we got done fighting, we all realized that couldn't have possibly been what we were fighting for.
 
2013-01-18 12:04:37 PM  
Eh, the company got the money for building them. They'll find another thing we "need" and get lobbyists to shove it through congress.
 
2013-01-18 12:08:28 PM  

thornhill: For all we know, the terrorists may have scrapped plans related to airplanes because they felt the new security measurers would increase the likelihood of their plan being stopped.


I call shenanigans on you! They have suicide bombers that carry out their deeds. And those bombers don't even have to make it through airport security to kill/injure a LOT of people in busy airports. Terrorists like making a point. They don't always have to have a plan. They often are content with simply wreaking havoc.

So, in that vein, spending millions of dollars on contracts, and more on the actual machines, seems kinda lame and solves very little. But, they succeed in making us fearful, and in making us buy into these idiotic regulations. Hooray.

/you are positive, I am just negative, so I couldn't stop myself from replying ;)
 
2013-01-18 12:10:17 PM  

HartRend: Ex Mil? Why do good people like you, who fought for our freedom, have to come home and be persecuted on domestic soil. Why do you have to socially engineer your way through the airport. Why don't we roll out the red carpet. It's a damn shame. They told us we were fighting for our families and our rights. After we got done fighting, we all realized that couldn't have possibly been what we were fighting for.


Meh, I sat on the DMZ in the 1980s and screwed Korean hookers. Never fired my rifle in anger.
 
2013-01-18 12:11:22 PM  
I think we aught to return them one by one and shove 'em up Michael Chertoff's ass.

/while running
//dry
///fark Chertoff and the
////black horse he rode in on.
 
2013-01-18 12:30:12 PM  

Liese: thornhill: For all we know, the terrorists may have scrapped plans related to airplanes because they felt the new security measurers would increase the likelihood of their plan being stopped.

I call shenanigans on you! They have suicide bombers that carry out their deeds. And those bombers don't even have to make it through airport security to kill/injure a LOT of people in busy airports. Terrorists like making a point. They don't always have to have a plan. They often are content with simply wreaking havoc.

So, in that vein, spending millions of dollars on contracts, and more on the actual machines, seems kinda lame and solves very little. But, they succeed in making us fearful, and in making us buy into these idiotic regulations. Hooray.

/you are positive, I am just negative, so I couldn't stop myself from replying ;)


That's the nature of security -- it's more about deterrence, and deterrence is not cost efficient because it isn't targeted. It's just about creating the appearance that you're not an easy target.

Look at any office building -- they tend to have an insane amount of security guards, card swipe turnstiles, check in requirements, etc. The purpose is just to make people think twice about how easy it will be to break into the building -- people always gravitate towards the easy targets.
 
2013-01-18 12:42:32 PM  

HartRend: Ex Mil? Why do good people like you, who fought for our freedom, have to come home and be persecuted on domestic soil. Why do you have to socially engineer your way through the airport. Why don't we roll out the red carpet. It's a damn shame. They told us we were fighting for our families and our rights. After we got done fighting, we all realized that couldn't have possibly been what we were fighting for.


Umm..not to say that Ha-Ha guy isn't a stand up fellow and all, but I doubt he's old enough to have fought for our freedom. Just saying.
 
2013-01-18 12:48:15 PM  
Does this mean we will get a full refund, from the manufacturer, on the scanners purchased ?
 
2013-01-18 12:54:06 PM  

Maul555: I am glad that they are being removed, but it is not for the right reason... Pretty sad that it took a technical problem to get this crap undone, and they will probably try to reintroduce newer models in the future.


yeah, Congress will authorize a billion dollars now for new scanner technology. They'll all know about it long before they actually authorize the money, so that any interested Congresscritter can invest in the company beforehand. But as long as we're "safe."
 
2013-01-18 12:56:34 PM  
It makes me sad I have to deal with this stupid shiat, but it also amuses me because the for profit reactionary hysteria in this country is a simpsons episode that didn't pass under the very low bar they set.
 
2013-01-18 01:04:31 PM  
Most of the airports I fly through have switched to the newer machines, but I still see these around. The last time I saw one it was 15 feet away from a line that only had a metal detector. The line for the body scanner had about 6 people in it. The line for the metal detector had 15-20 people. A TSA agent was borderline berating people for not choosing the faster, shorter line. No one switched lines.
 
2013-01-18 01:16:28 PM  

HartRend: Sure are a lot of shops out there:


i152.photobucket.com
 
2013-01-18 01:16:48 PM  
If a child goes through one of these things could you arrest somebody for owning child porn. Arrest the tsa...:
 
2013-01-18 01:17:03 PM  

bmwericus: I think we aught to return them one by one and shove 'em up Michael Chertoff's ass.

/while running
//dry
///fark Chertoff and the
////black horse he rode in on.


Your jib, it is cut well.
 
2013-01-18 01:20:52 PM  
Since I was at the meeting where The Fascists were told this TSA Authoritarian Fantasy was not possible to create/enforce, I am getting such a kick,,,

/ Tom Ridge was correct and TSA MUST DIE
 
2013-01-18 01:21:29 PM  

Nhojwolfe: If a child goes through one of these things could you arrest somebody for owning child porn. Arrest the tsa...:


"Not illegal when we do it"
 
2013-01-18 01:24:39 PM  

HartRend: ha-ha-guy: Liese: ha-ha-guy: I always opted out because I figured between flying across the Pacific multiple times a year and whatnot, I didn't need any extra help with regard to the cancer risk.

Agreed. One time, in IAH when I opted out, this agent (not the one that patted me down, but a female) said as she was walking by, kinda flippantly, "Well sure you already have laptops and cell phones and other things contributing, why not get in a quick scanner?"

Wasn't sure if she was being snarky or not.

If she's working in the TSA Crotch Touching Division, odds are she doesn't grasp things like wave length or just because you're exposed to some risk factors means you should expose yourself to all of them.

What I've found is the nicer you dress, the lower the odds you have of trouble. Sport coat, my first class boarding pass visible, and perhaps something to mark me as ex military leads to much better treatment than the time I was in jeans and a hoodie. Just have to socially engineer your way through the checkpoint.

Ex Mil? Why do good people like you, who fought for our freedom, have to come home and be persecuted on domestic soil. Why do you have to socially engineer your way through the airport. Why don't we roll out the red carpet. It's a damn shame. They told us we were fighting for our families and our rights. After we got done fighting, we all realized that couldn't have possibly been what we were fighting for.


The US Military is simply a mercenary force rented to Bigg Oil and most recently, Bigg Opium.
Prolly for anyone else that can afford it.
 
2013-01-18 01:28:41 PM  

Private_Citizen: i upped my meds-up yours: Time to fap to sexy TSA official Susan Hallowell one more time. Flash it Suz!
[2.bp.blogspot.com image 200x308][www.microwaves101.com image 400x331]

I've always thought that picture was key to this whole argument. It's the only one that was ever released, and it can tell us much. For example, if that had been a guy, we would know if he was circumcised or not. The detail is incredible - and Very revealing. But much lesser known is this: she's carrying two guns - not one. That technology has a very hard time picking up guns and weapons on peoples sides - it needs the body as a back ground. If you look very closely, you can tell she has a second gun on her hip (where most people carry them anyway). This failure of the technology explains how Adam Savage (yes, of Mythbusters) was able to carry huge metal knives for a foam cutting tool through the airport - they were on his side and therefore invisible to the scanner.

So, we had a tool that was incredibly invasive, yet demonstrably bad at it's stated job. Good riddance.


Just like the TSA "management?" was told. Chertoff had another agenda and worked it well.
Why is this not criminal?
 
2013-01-18 01:34:51 PM  
The reason that the scanners have left the airports is that their job at the airports is complete.

The scanners were never intended to be used to protect airline passengers from weapons-holding attackers. Those scanners exist to collect a photographic inventory of the cattle of the USA.

Anyone who refuses to enter the scanner is harassed in a show of humiliation and threatened with a fine.

The more complete the cattle inventory is, the more convenient it will be to identify individuals to be eliminated from a distance, by the use drones or other means. Otherwise, there would be more collateral damage.

The USG has a history of collecting information like this, but not on this large a scale. They have been doing facial recognition for over a decade at airports and other camera-covered places using databases of convicted drug offenders amongst others.

The government is NOT YOUR FRIEND and it is NOT YOUR PARENT, no matter how much it attempts to claim to be. Stop letting them trample your natural rights. A right lost is a right given away.
 
2013-01-18 01:42:47 PM  

dynomutt: The reason that the scanners have left the airports is that their job at the airports is complete.


How so? Other scanners are still there. And it's not like new passengers don't ever come through the gates. So their job, if I'm understanding you right, wouldn't ever be complete.

The scanners were never intended to be used to protect airline passengers from weapons-holding attackers.

wat

Those scanners exist to collect a photographic inventory of the cattle of the USA.

wat

Anyone who refuses to enter the scanner is harassed in a show of humiliation and threatened with a fine.

Incorrect. Where the hell are you flying out of?

The more complete the cattle inventory is, the more convenient it will be to identify individuals to be eliminated from a distance, by the use drones or other means. Otherwise, there would be more collateral damage.

...What is this I don't even...

The USG has a history of collecting information like this, but not on this large a scale. They have been doing facial recognition for over a decade at airports and other camera-covered places using databases of convicted drug offenders amongst others.

Do you have a driver's license? Cause you gave 'em info for a database on that, too. Ooh, scary.

The government is NOT YOUR FRIEND and it is NOT YOUR PARENT, no matter how much it attempts to claim to be. Stop letting them trample your natural rights. A right lost is a right given away.

I just can't agree due to the other strange things about drones and government picking people off. Interesting theory, though.

Still, 0/10.
 
2013-01-18 01:50:09 PM  
Well, you spineless, pants-wetting, anal-leaking, yellow-backed, Lilly-livered, limp-wristed farking faries got what you wanted. Now all you have to do is give up your right to vote.
 
2013-01-18 01:51:50 PM  

HartRend: [1.bp.blogspot.com image 465x349]

I have never been through one of these. I "opt out" when I fly. I love making a scene about it too.
There is no way to generate an image like that without using high frequency radio waves (I am a wireless radio engineer, I know wtf I'm talking about).
High freq waves are damn good at causing cancer, the scanner is about the equivalent of standing under a cell tower for 8 hours or so.


Do you have kids? Do you want those thugs at airport security looking at your underage daughters naked body? Because they are...


Your point is weakened by the fact that you are using a completely fake picture.
 
2013-01-18 01:53:52 PM  
Went through a scanner last year at Newark. The picture revealed I was carrying something in my right pocket. TSA agent came over with gloved hand and felt my pocket. I reached in and pulled out a quarter. Damn. Forgot I was carrying. I could have killed somebody with that.
 
2013-01-18 02:06:53 PM  
I spent hours reading all of the documentation about these machines that are calibrated and tested once a year and handled by people who are not trained radiologists thousands and thousands of times per year. Those people did not get dosimeters.

I stopped flying.

I'm beyond delighted they are getting rid of these things. I suspect my relatives on the other coast will be happy to see me, finally.
 
2013-01-18 02:07:18 PM  
hey stupid people. The latest machines in use now show you a blurry image, but in the masturbation room, its still full on naked image. uploaded to the main data base to be used as evidence in case you commit some type of illegal activity in the next few years.


/idiots who don't know anything about dual image display software.
 
2013-01-18 02:24:11 PM  
I wanna know what happens if someone with a piercing in an, erm, special place opts for a patdown and they feel it.  Do they make you strip so they can be certain it's not some kind of contraband?

/asking for a friend
 
2013-01-18 02:34:55 PM  

sheep snorter: in case you commit some type of illegal activity in the next few years.


I had to check to see if you and dynomutt were possibly the same person.

Funny that you're referring to us as the stupid people, when you have to have a photo ID/passport to get through the security anyway. Why use a backscatter if people can opt out of it? Seems like that'd defeat the purpose/be inefficient, no?
 
2013-01-18 02:37:50 PM  

Moose23: Went through a scanner last year at Newark. The picture revealed I was carrying something in my right pocket. TSA agent came over with gloved hand and felt my pocket. I reached in and pulled out a quarter. Damn. Forgot I was carrying. I could have killed somebody with that.


I had $39 and some broken rubber bands. Since I grew up watching McGuyver I can make a thermonuclear warhead out of that. The TSA was right to panic.
 
2013-01-18 02:40:38 PM  

WarszawaScream: Do they make you strip so they can be certain it's not some kind of contraband?


Does it set off a metal detector? Because my vagina parts and nipples, for instance, don't get felt up. However if nipple piercings showed through a thin shirt/they saw the impression, maybe they'd ask. I got asked about my socks--I had thigh-high socks that I hadn't pulled all the way up/they slouched a little and she felt the bumps on my shins. But unless your penis is hanging down your pantleg then they probably wouldn't feel it.

If you're even somewhat handsome, though, and the dude kinda likes other dudes, then they may just ask you to step into a back room anyway.

/this post has now slightly turned me on
 
2013-01-18 02:41:33 PM  

freewill: what_now: Ok, has anyone tested these at all? Because fark you, TSA. I still won't go though them.

This falls more under the category of "general physics". My understanding is that ionizing radiation can fark up your atoms and thereby your DNA, while non-ionizing radiation can't, because, well, that's why it's called that. It doesn't have the energy it needs to knock electrons off your atoms and create ions.

That said, in my decidedly non-expert opinion, the whole body scanner thing is idiotic to begin with and should die. I'm yet to see a compelling argument that this is vital to security, as opposed to a huge boondoggle for manufacturers.


Microwaves are non-ionizing but can provide enough energy to change molecules. :(
 
2013-01-18 03:01:56 PM  
Chertoff got his cut of the action. Now throw them away.
 
2013-01-18 03:10:10 PM  
Damn it! One or two more times and I'd be fully ready to father a race of mutants!

/well, after finding a willing mother, of course
//proving to be more of a challenge than I had hoped
///nobody wants to birth mutant children these days, it's very sad
 
2013-01-18 03:17:01 PM  

SpectroBoy: HartRend: [1.bp.blogspot.com image 465x349]

I have never been through one of these. I "opt out" when I fly. I love making a scene about it too.
There is no way to generate an image like that without using high frequency radio waves (I am a wireless radio engineer, I know wtf I'm talking about).
High freq waves are damn good at causing cancer, the scanner is about the equivalent of standing under a cell tower for 8 hours or so.


Do you have kids? Do you want those thugs at airport security looking at your underage daughters naked body? Because they are...

Your point is weakened by the fact that you are using a completely fake picture.


I posted some real ones after somebody else pointed that out.
 
2013-01-18 03:22:24 PM  

MorePeasPlease: HartRend: Sure are a lot of shops out there:

[i152.photobucket.com image 320x240]


Is this what passes for humor now among the younger generations?
 
2013-01-18 03:31:04 PM  
Don't worry, the TSA will come up with something even more ridiculous and/or radiating / inconvenient to replace this asinine device.
 
2013-01-18 04:34:39 PM  
And maybe they will go out of business for making a peepshow for the immoral folks at the TSA. One can only hope.
 
2013-01-18 04:38:25 PM  

gelovani: Don't worry, the TSA will come up with something even more ridiculous and/or radiating / inconvenient to replace this asinine device.


What???
Device worked/s perfectly.
Chertoff and his frat bros are quite wealth now, TYVM.
Now, it is somebody else's turn to grab your balls money.
Just look at it.
 
2013-01-18 06:45:09 PM  

Liese: vagina parts


Like many people, I think of the vagina  as a part which cannot be further divided, and don't give any thought to the wondrous sub-vaginal particles modern science has discovered.  Are you some sort of physicist?
 
2013-01-18 06:48:21 PM  
I go through scanners 1-2 times a week, so 30 times or so a year, at over 20 airports.

Have yet to be pulled out for anything more than a routine arm-wand.

I guess I don't act like an asswit to the mall cops with the tazers.

Its not their fault they're dumbasses.  At least they're employed now.
 
2013-01-18 06:55:29 PM  
Good. I stopped flying almost two years ago when they showed up at the local airport. I've visited prisons, all of which treated their visitors with more dignity and respect than the airlines/TSA allow. I'd like to start flying again, but not a f**king chance until those things are gone.
 
2013-01-18 07:57:42 PM  

freewill: I'm yet to see a compelling argument that this is vital to security, as opposed to a huge boondoggle for manufacturers.


It's not just not vital, it's arguably worse. Metal detectors work even if the metal is hidden; these devices only work if it's very near the surface and has regular edges. If you got a fat dude to stick a gun under his gut roll these machines would be unable to detect it, whereas an old school metal detector would. In theory these machines allow the detection of non-metal objects, which I guess is useful, but again they do it based on shape not material, so they're only good enough to stop people that leave their C4 in bricks rather than shaping it to their body.
 
2013-01-18 08:12:19 PM  

HartRend: I "opt out" when I fly. I love making a scene about it too.


Me too. I like to call it the "porno scanner" to their face. Local airport no longer has them, they said "no, that's LAX, we don't have them". Good old airport competition.
 
2013-01-18 08:51:05 PM  
When showing off your jail's new body scanner, do not offer to be a guinea pig for the press, or you might end up with your junk on the front page:
media.mlive.com
media.mlive.com
 
2013-01-18 10:19:00 PM  
This is awesome!
 
2013-01-18 11:05:12 PM  

HartRend: [1.bp.blogspot.com image 465x349]

I have never been through one of these. I "opt out" when I fly. I love making a scene about it too.
There is no way to generate an image like that without using high frequency radio waves (I am a wireless radio engineer, I know wtf I'm talking about).
High freq waves are damn good at causing cancer, the scanner is about the equivalent of standing under a cell tower for 8 hours or so.


Do you have kids? Do you want those thugs at airport security looking at your underage daughters naked body? Because they are...


Exactly. I hope that and the image a couple posts above yours are the scanners that produce the images the article is talking about, because yes, those are EXTREMELY invasive.
 
2013-01-19 12:04:29 AM  

HartRend: [1.bp.blogspot.com image 465x349]

I have never been through one of these. I "opt out" when I fly. I love making a scene about it too.
There is no way to generate an image like that without using high frequency radio waves (I am a wireless radio engineer, I know wtf I'm talking about).
High freq waves are damn good at causing cancer, the scanner is about the equivalent of standing under a cell tower for 8 hours or so.


Do you have kids? Do you want those thugs at airport security looking at your underage daughters naked body? Because they are...


Bullshiat. Radio waves are NOT ionizing and a danger to DNA and there's zero data supporting they're carcinogenic. Radio waves cause heat. They can cook you but not cause cancer.

Radio engineer FAIL.
 
Displayed 130 of 130 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report