Comments on: Airport screeners could see X-rated X-rays

Homeland Security plans to test machines at airport checkpoints that see through clothing and create a detailed body image.
Photos: Scanners search through clothing
The New York Times

Are they already using this technology in Heathrow?

In August, 2004, I was singled out of the security check-in line at
Heathrow Airport in London and asked to stand in front of a large
machine. I was told to turn to the side and then to raise and lower
my arms etc. just as I would for an x-ray. No explanation was
given.

Only the women in the security line were singled out for this
treatment. Was this a test of this new technology?

Probably

They are also getting a test run at a terminal in London's Heathrow airport, the first major airport to use them.

Source:
http://www.daijiworld.com/news/news_disp.asp?n_id=11475&n_***=It+Happens+'only+in+America'+-+Visitors+to+be+Scanned+Naked+at+US+Airports!

hmm...

are we getting psychotic about security or is it just me?

i think it would be better placed to find out how to *not* upset people around the globe and trash their homes than continuously instituting policies that will erode our privacy...

my 2 cents...

Simpler solution

For a fraction of the price, the Department of
Homeland [sic] Security could tweak this plan to
make it far more egalitarian and foolproof.

First: ban clothing of any sort at airports and
aboard aircraft. Totally nude is the only way to
be secure. The security checkpoint can then be
reduced to doing a couple of jumping jacks in
front of a web-cam (we could even turn that into
a revenue stream to feed back into the DHS). Can
you imagine how quick it would be to get through
security? Sure, it would be awkward at first,
but people would get used to it if they knew
they were safe and their government was doing it
to make them safe. It would promote a good sense
of humor, break-down interpersonal barriers, and
give a much needed boost to the velour
upholstery industry.

Second: ban baggage and cargo of any sort. Have
separate planes for your bags and such. No
carry-ons mean quicker boarding times. The cargo
portions of planes can be retrofitted with
seats, permitting more passengers per plane, and
when that fellow in the harbor with a
surface-to-air missle shoots down a plane, 50%
of the time it will simply rain down luggage!

And, finally: the DHS has a no-fly list that is
keyed by the person's name. Obviously, this is
useless because names names aren't unique and
because someone that's up to something might use
a false name (I know, bombers may be sociopaths
but that doesn't mean that they lie -- but it's
a possibility). Instead, we could have the
computer pick a name at random and compare that
to the no-fly list. If there's a match, the
person would need to do twice as many naked
jumping jacks in front of the web-cam! (Why is
it that so many coeds in the Virgin Atlantic
ticket line get assigned the name "al Zarqawi"?
The mind boggles.)

I better go patent this "business method" while
it's still hot...

[TV James]

This would solve more problems.

And people who don't fit into one seat but refuse to buy a second ticket could be assigned more jumping jacks until they slimmed down enough to fit into the seat or until they gave up and bought the extra ticket.

Not that I'd want to watch. *shudder*

[Bob_Barker]

You forgot cavity searches

"Spread your cheeks and lift your sack please sir."

[Stating]

NudeAir

Sorry, no hot beverage service on this airline.

Good solution

Sir -

Your solution is humorously presented and has a snowflake's chance of ever being adopted. Yet it is a sane, workable plan that would achieve the stated goal.

Only our puritanical prejudices stand in the way, and that is what bothers me most about this whole topic. We are SO uncomfortable with our own biological selves that, in this case, we literally risk death rather than admit that being seen naked in proper circumstances is no big deal.

Abuse of power

The one thing you have to always consider, when you talk about government employees ( at all levels ), is: "who's watching the watchers?".

The temptation and opportunity for abuse is a multiple of the degree of authority that any person is given.

You see this every day when dealing with beaurocrats at any local, state, or federal agency.

We are giving up our freedoms, slowly but surely, for "the sake of freedom".
Does this make sense?

[m.meister]

Ben Franklin quote time (again)

They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security,
deserve neither liberty or security.

-- Ben Franklin.

argument lacking

Your argument is fascinatingly under-powered. What "authority" precisely is being given here that isn't already given?

The new airport X-Ray machines

A fantastic idea.... except that muslim women will not be allowed to be scanned as it is against their religion for any man other than their husband to know their bodies.... expect large lawsuits and legislative procedures to go with this technology!
As it is in banks,where we cannot enter wearing a motorcycle helmet ,yet they can enter in full burker or yashmak!

[Razzl]

Boycott flying...

...until W's administration gets it about our devotion to our rights and personal privacy. Most of the measures which have been instituted in airports in the US since 9/11 are "fake" measures designed to make us think there is security until they can manufacture enough of their bomb-sniffing devices to put in every airport. We don't have to stand for this, or for the Patriot Act, or any of the other warped controls the crypto-fascists are trying to impose. As that great Republican orator Nancy Reagan once said, "Just say 'no'"!

[jspr]

This is what is required,

This is what is required, but too many people value their convieniance ofver what is right

[m.meister]

As long as we are free, there is always risk

Fact -- as long as we remain a free nation, there will always be
right of terrorism. Even if we give up our freedoms, there is
always a risk of terrorism.

You cannot stop the single-minded person that is willing to give
up his/her life to terrorize others. You may prevent one, but
there is always the risk.

In the meantime, our freedoms and rights are being stripped
away left and right. We need to start concerning ourselves with
this "protecting" government.

Anyone that thinks the government would never do such a thing
to its own citizens needs to look at our history (check out our
20th Century -- Hoover's FBI, WWII Japanese detention centers,
and the McCarthism era are a good start). And dig a little deeper
to find how our government sanctioned giving mentally ill
patients radioactive substances so they could see what happens
to the body as a result of the exposure.

[Christopher Hall]

The revolution will be televised

Remember: the next major revolution in the US is in November, 2007.

I've never been very privacy-minded myself, but I'm interested in learning more. Do you think we'd be better off if we pulled all the stops? Wouldn't that leave our infrastructure vulnerable?

[george_humphrey]

Its actually very beneficial

These machines should be deployed not only in airports but in every public venue where large numbers of people gather.

Amazingly enough the real benefit to these devices is not the increased security. The real benefit will be their impact to America's current obesity crisis.

Think of it, imagine how motivated Americans will be to lose all that extra fat once they realize that everyone near the security scanner will be able to look over the screener's shoulder and see just exactly how much of that bulk under the loose clothing really is them!

Entering any school building, a movie theatre, a mall, any govrnment bldg.

Why they'll probably start exercising too!

After 5 years of this Health care costs will actually start going down!

After 30 years deaths and hospitalization due to heart attacks, strokes and diabetes will be greatly diminished!

We could save enough money on medicare to fix the social security funding gap.

I say we put these suckers everywhere, even at the entrance to our jobs and churches!

[Sboston]

Blow it out your wazoo!

There are a lot of people that are over weight for other reasons that over eating and not exercising.

[Christopher Hall]

Do they ask for phone numbers if they see something they like?

Why don't we just skip all this technology mumbo-jumbo and abolish clothing?

I'm not entirely sure how I would handle suggestive looks or winks from security personnel, though.

[Sboston]

easy enough

Wear lead lined undies.

[nozza_prog]

Men for men, Women for women

It wouldn't solve all the problems, but maybe there should be two queues of people going through the scanners seperated by gender. If a woman knows that another woman is looking at her rather than a man it would at least lessen the worry of peeping.

Being inspected in the nip should not be too much of a new thing anyway, your doctor has probably seen the private parts of your body before, why is a security guard any different?

Just make sure they are trustworthy individuals - not just any teenager who was willing to work for the minimum wage.

Perhaps the machine could even be made to censor the images given certain criteria?

On another note I am for the whole 'freedom' thing, so perhaps this invention shouldnt be used this way?

[Christopher Hall]

How about Taoist Monks?

They seem like perfect candidates for this sort of thing. Some of the best people the world's ever produced!

[Bob_Barker]

Umm

Have you seen some of the TSA people? I wouldn't trust most of them with my wallet as it goes through the machine. And a doctor seeing you naked versus a security guard is tad bit different. Women would especially agree with this.

[rayar]

This is intrusive

I think this is a bad idea... The reasons are right but the use is wrong... Check this data sheet from the company site.. you can see everything...

http://www.rapiscansystems.com/datasheets/Rapiscan_Secure1000_Screen.pdf

Go home.

Go home.

[Bill Warnock]

x-rated x-rays

As with many professions, it is a matter of ethics. Screeners for this type of position, will be required to undergo a full-field background investigation and take an oath never to reveal to anyone outside the chain of command. Those breaking that oath, upon conviction should be confined for a minimum of five years in a federal facility and fined a minimum of $50,000, no exceptions. I might suggest they receive a portion of their training from board certified anatomists and they be in an inclosed space free from onlookers. A signaling device can be used to pull the person who has cause for concern. The image will be frozen for further examination. There will have to be many of them such screeners as more than 20 minutes looking at a screen, the brain turns to mush.
Sincerely,

[TimeBomb]

Applause

I applaud your post. And I agree completely. This administration--and the entire federal government--has gone totally out of control. And I thought the Clinton years were bad! (If, 5 years ago, you had told me I'd miss Clinton, I would have told you that you're nuts!)

One correction, though: The illustrious United States government didn't restrict its hapless radiation-testing victims to the mentally ill; they did it on anyone they thought they could get away with it on. I recently worked for one of the third-party institutions that was part of the Manhattan Project. The building they did the testing in is still there (too costly for them to destroy it), so they turned it into an office building--an office building with radiation warnings strewn about the place (only where legally required, of course). I flatly refused to go to that building, so I had to quit.

And let's not forget the Tuskegee experiments. The list goes on and on...

This "select few airports" is them feeling us out, to see if we'll put up with it. I'm sure there won't be any shortage of people who buy their lies, and eat it right up.

[TimeBomb]

2007?

November 2007? Do you mean November, 2008?

[TimeBomb]

Senators? Reps?

Will senators and congressional representatives, and their families, walk through these scanners?

Yeah, right.

[kuyaz]

Free Porn?

So if a child goes through this device, then can the security agent be arrested for viewing child pornography?

[Sam Papelbon]

no...

neither is a doctor delivering a baby charged with molesting a minor. it's their job. or middle school gym teachers monitoring their students in the locker room.

which brings to mind... there are only a VERY small number of people who cried about having to take showers in gym class. what happened when they grew up that they get all scared of a stranger, who will be seeing hundreds upon hundreds of fuzzy images, seeing a fuzzy image of them?

People! Let's think rationally!

I cannot believe how hung-up our society is over the appearance of our God-given bodies. X-rated, even when there WAS an X-rating, meant overt sexual activity. Seeing someone's unclothed body should not (in an ideal world) be a souce of discomfort or embarrassment for either the viewer or the viewed.

For the record, I am not in favor of ANY intrusive, mandatory searches as a matter of principle, but this hysteria over these new body scanners is unbelievable.

Let's just require flying nude... no carry-on baggage allowed, and all checked baggage would fly on a companion aircraft. That would solve the screening and airline security problem 100%. I propose that Air France be the pilot airline for this approach.

And in response to the commenter's quip about "child pornography," again, it is only pornography if there is a sexual component. Is your pediatrician a prima facie pedophile if he examines your child unclothed?

[rockerrb]

privacy?`

It is getting to the point that if u want to fly in the US then u should expect a resonable invasion of your privacy. Right now there is still no requirement that all cockpit doors on planes be reinforced and there are few airmarshalls in the sky. The US Federal Govt has done a terrible job of increasing airport secrurity since 9/11. It would be best if men and woman went thru separate lines with same sex security works. It will get to the point where if u don't want this level of privacy invasion then u will have no choice other than not to fly. National biometic ID cards are also on the way.

[Stating]

Just Largesse For Corporations

This kind of spending is just taxpayer paid largesse for defense related companies. One of the players in this space is American Science and Engineering. This company also makes a mobile van based scanner system that surreptitiously scans people and vehicles. This company's stock has gone from $10 to $50 in two years. Many of the execs have Aerospace & Defense backgrounds. As DHS doles out money, a whole bunch of security company execs and insiders are making a killing.

How much competitive bidding do you think is taking place for technologies like this scanner? How many companies have clearance to make it and sell it? It's just more of the same corporate welfare we've had since the 1960's as we entered the "cold war".

For more info:
http://www.as-e.com/american_science_and_engineering/index.asp
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=ASEI&t=2y

Corporate XRay Profits

I made so many millions of dollars by buying xray technology and security company stocks that I travel by private jet now....

Ha Ha You Sniveling Losers..

Airport security

If this stops another 9/11 style attack GOOD. Lets see would I rather be safe flying or not??? The answer is yes, If you do not like it ride the bus. And yes I have a great looking wife I bet they make her go threw twice.

[pcLoadLetter]

Coward or fool?

Perhaps you are both.

This is completely unamerican and an erosion of not only our rights, but the priciples and way of life that the founding fathers envisioned for america.

That anyone would willingly give up rights and priveleges that millions fought and died for because they falsely assume it will keep them safe, deserves to live in a country that is more intrusive then any communist country to date.

Oh wait, America is turning into that state, and the cowards go along because they are afraid.

A sad day indeed that so many americans have turned into bloody cowards.

[jspr]

And this Bright crayon

Yes, stupidity now is closer than you think when really 'smart' people support it.
If you want your wife to be seen naked in public, make a porn website about, but dont support stupid "solutions" to making us "safer"

[Hernys]

Can be done without affecting privacy

Easy solution:
Distort the image in a way that makes it incomprehensible, but still allow for the detection of hidden weapons. For example, a horizontal sine wave displacement, combined with some color distortion (like reverse color) would make the image unrecognizable enough on the whole, but still allow for the detection of small objects. While I wouldn't like to be seen nude by the airport personnel (even if they don't know who I am) I wouldn't have trouble with them seeing a strongly distorted picture that doesn't even seem human.
On the other hand, I wonder why we feel attacked when a screener sees a picture of our body, but then have no trouble in posing nude for a physician... Maybe it's that we don't feel that the screening is for our own protection.

[pcLoadLetter]

Still won't help

As was noted in the article, a fat person could smuggle anything they want in their rolls of fat. yuck.

This is yet another attempt on our freedoms with nothing gained. Besides, no amount of security gained is worth losing our nation. Is it?

Look what we have become. We went from "live free, or die" to "here are my rights, please make me safe mr fascist president". And it only took ~225 years.

How many countless millions(billions probably) of people around the world and throughout history has given everything up just for the idea of freedom? Yet, we ignorantly give up freedom that has been paid for, in the blood and sacrifices of millions, just because we are afraid. History will not be kind to us, that is if anyone in the future has the right to free-thought.