- Related Stories
-
National ID cards on the way?
February 14, 2005 -
Fingerprints, iris scans to tighten U.K. borders
February 7, 2005 -
Digital Agenda: Homeland security--Companies profiting from fear
October 18, 2004 -
E-passports to put new face on old documents
August 18, 2004 -
Iris scanning to begin at German airport
February 13, 2004
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
The story "Airport screeners could see X-rated X-rays" published May 24, 2005 at 5:44 AM is no longer available on CNET News.
Content from The New York Times expires after 7 days.






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?
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!
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...
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...
Not that I'd want to watch. *shudder*
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.
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?
deserve neither liberty or security.
-- Ben Franklin.
As it is in banks,where we cannot enter wearing a motorcycle helmet ,yet they can enter in full burker or yashmak!
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.
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?
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!
I'm not entirely sure how I would handle suggestive looks or winks from security personnel, though.
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?
http://www.rapiscansystems.com/datasheets/Rapiscan_Secure1000_Screen.pdf
Sincerely,
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.
Yeah, right.
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?
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?
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
Ha Ha You Sniveling Losers..
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.
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"
- Can be done without affecting privacy
- by Hernys May 25, 2005 7:17 PM PDT
- Easy solution:
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
-
- Still won't help
- by pcLoadLetter May 25, 2005 9:49 PM PDT
- As was noted in the article, a fat person could smuggle anything they want in their rolls of fat. yuck.
- Like this View reply
Processing -
Showing 1 of 2 pages (118 Comments)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.
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.