zIFBoards gives you all the tools to create a successful discussion community.
zIFBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Welcome to The Great Deception. We hope you enjoy your visit.
You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.
Join our community!
If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Name:   Password:


Pages: (4) [1] 2 3 ... Last » ( Go to first unread post )

 Body Scanners - Follow Money! Who Sells Them, Report " scanners ineffective, wasteful"
jofortruth
Posted: Jan 4 2010, 08:48 PM


Administrator


Group: Admin
Posts: 34,801
Member No.: 1
Joined: 1-May 07



DO YOU KNOW WHAT FRAUDULENT INCIDENT SPURRED THE BODYSCANNERS BEING INSTALLED IN MOST AIRPORTS? YEP, IT WAS FRAUD!

THE UNDERWEAR BOMBER INCIDENT WAS A SCAM, AND IT CAME OUT IN TESTIMONY IN CONGRESS THAT IT WAS A SCAM. THEN IMMEDIATELY AFTER THAT INCIDENT, CHERTOFF STARTED PUTTING BODYSCANNERS (WAITING IN WAREHOUSES AND DANGEROUS TO YOUR HEALTH AND PRIVACY) INTO AIRPORTS AND THEN PROFITED FROM THEM PERSONALLY. THIS IS TRUE FOLKS, AND MICHAEL HAS NO CONSCIENCE ABOUT LYING TO YOU!

http://z4.invisionfree.com/The_Great_Decep...?showtopic=7980

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chertoff Linked to Body Scanner Manufacturer:
http://www.infowars.com/chertoff-linked-to...r-manufacturer/

QUOTE
What he has made little mention of is that the Chertoff Group, his security consulting agency, includes a client that manufactures the machines.


WELL, WELL OUR OLD DHS HEAD! WHAT A SURPRISE THAT HE WOULD BE INVOLVED IN PROFITING OFF OF THESE SCANNERS! rolleyes.gif

Chertoff Profits From Full Body Scanners And Other Police State Technology
http://www.rense.com/general89/chert.htm

Former homeland security chief argues for whole-body imaging
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...9123101746.html

Michael Chertoff Pitchman for Full Body Scanners (Jan 2010)
http://strandedpassengers.blogspot.com/201...tchman-for.html

Chertoff security firm hires Hayden, three others
http://washingtontechnology.com/articles/2...ree-others.aspx
http://z4.invisionfree.com/The_Great_Decep...p?showtopic=714
http://z4.invisionfree.com/The_Great_Decep...?showtopic=1895

More on Airport travesties:
http://z4.invisionfree.com/The_Great_Decep...topic=6913&st=0


PEOPLE, YOU SHOULD BE OUTRAGED BY THIS! THIS IS NOT ABOUT YOUR SAFETY, IT'S ABOUT CONTROL OVER THE PUBLIC! IF YOU KEEP GIVING IN TO THE TYRANNY, YOU WILL ONLY GET MORE OF THE SAME!

SEE A POSTER BELOW OF WHAT THESE BODY SCANNERS CAPTURE!

PLEASE PRINT AND PASS OUT TO EDUCATE OTHERS!
Top
jofortruth
Posted: Jan 4 2010, 08:51 PM


Administrator


Group: Admin
Posts: 34,801
Member No.: 1
Joined: 1-May 07



QUOTE
CHICAGO -The market for full-body scanners, now being considered for wider use in airport security, includes many more potential end users, according to manufacturer L-3 Communications Holdings Inc. (LLL).

In an interview, Tom Ripp, president of Security and Detection Systems at L-3, said 200 of the company's SafeView body scanners have been deployed worldwide. The potential market includes thousands of airport locations as well as courthouses, prisons, border crossings and rail facilities.

L-3 and OSI Systems Inc. (OSIS) are the only two companies certified to make full-body scanners for the U.S. government.


NOTE: Look how their stock moved after PATSIE BOMBER event on Christmas Day:
http://lvlt.client.shareholder.com/stockqu...=10%2F30%2F2004


ProVision is another company that makes these (L3):
http://www.crunchgear.com/2010/02/23/tsa-o...ered-some-time/
http://www.governmentvideo.com/article/85646

Attached Image (Click thumbnail to expand)
Attached Image
Top
jofortruth
Posted: Jan 4 2010, 08:59 PM


Administrator


Group: Admin
Posts: 34,801
Member No.: 1
Joined: 1-May 07



Former homeland security chief argues for whole-body imaging
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...9123101746.html

QUOTE
By Michael Chertoff (Rather self-serving to write this article aye Michael?)  rolleyes.gif
Friday, January 1, 2010; A15

Since the uncomfortably close attempted attack on Northwest Flight 253 last week, many have focused on why the alleged terrorist, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, was not placed on a watch list that would have prevented him from flying, even though the government had received information that he was a potential extremist. We should focus on a more fundamental question: How can we keep explosive materials off planes?

Most airport security checkpoints use metal detectors. Al-Qaeda has shown that it knows how to avoid detection by using an explosive device that contains little or no metal, such as PETN, or pentaerythritol tetranitrate, used by Abdulmutallab and "shoe bomber" Richard Reid in 2001.

During my time as secretary of homeland security, the Transportation Security Administration began working to replace the 1970s-era metal detectors used at airports across America with modern technology able to detect non-metal weapons concealed by terrorists on their bodies -- even in their underwear, where Abdulmutallab allegedly hid his bomb. The latest versions of these machines -- sometimes called whole-body imagers -- are deployed at 19 airports, and the TSA is attempting to place them throughout the nation.

From the onset, deployment of the machines has been vigorously opposed by some groups. In June, the House of Representatives passed a bill that would prevent the TSA from using the new systems in most cases. If the House bill were to become law, the TSA would be limited to using the new technology only after a passenger had been selected for additional scrutiny. The vast majority of passengers would still pass only through metal detectors. So, under the standards set by the House bill, a terrorist not on a "no-fly" list or a watch list mandating closer scrutiny -- like Abdulmutallab -- could probably carry a concealed non-metal weapon onto a plane undetected.

Congress should reject this restrictive bill and instead fund a large-scale deployment of next-generation systems.

Opposition to whole-body imagers essentially relies on three arguments. First, the American Civil Liberties Union and privacy advocates have complained that the machines subject passengers to a "virtual strip search." Second, they claim that the machines are unsafe because they expose passengers to dangerous amounts of radiation in screening. Third, some critics argue that the only correct approach to airline security lies in better intelligence.

All of these objections lack merit. The "safety" concern is particularly specious, because the technologies expose people to no more radiation than is experienced in daily life.

The case of Abdulmutallab shows that we cannot simply "rely on intelligence." Abdulmutallab was not on a watch list that required closer scrutiny. Even if the review President Obama has ordered closes a gap that would have put Abdulmutallab or others on more select watch lists, there are plenty of terrorists out there about whom we know nothing. Too many potentially dangerous people simply would not appear on any watch list. We cannot put all our eggs in the "intelligence basket." That's why, since Sept. 11, 2001, we have worked to establish multiple layers of defense to protect the American people. Watch lists surely are an important layer, as is intelligence-sharing, but others, such as the deployment of advanced detection technology, are just as important.

Claims that the screening amounts to "virtual strip searches" is calculated to alarm the public. As if screening is meant to reveal people's private parts to TSA officers. But the agency has nonetheless taken privacy concerns seriously in creating procedures for using this technology. In deploying the machines, the TSA has strictly limited the number of officers who see the images; separates the officers looking at images from the passengers being screened (so the officers do not know which passengers the images belong to); and uses software to blur the faces on the images -- further protecting the anonymity of passengers. Moreover, the machines are configured to prevent TSA officers from storing or retaining any images. As an additional measure, passengers can choose not to walk through one of the machines and receive a physical examination instead.

In short, the TSA has listened to the reasonable concerns of privacy advocates and incorporated numerous suggestions into its protocols to draw the right balance between security and privacy. The administration must stand firm against privacy ideologues, for whom every security measure is unacceptable. Failing to use all available tools to plug a gap in security puts the lives of airline travelers needlessly at risk.

The writer was secretary of homeland security from 2005 to 2009 and is co-founder of the Chertoff Group, a security and risk-management firm whose clients include a manufacturer of body-imaging screening machines.


The House Bill he refers to that was passed in the House and now sits stalled in a Senate committee headed by Rockefeller:
http://z4.invisionfree.com/The_Great_Decep...7857&st=0&#last

What a scumbag! He and his company will be profiting from the installation of these scanners.

He has a major conflict of interest, but he doesn't care! These arrogant SOB's think the rules don't apply to them and that they can profit from anything they promote!

People, if you don't say NO to these bodyscanners, you will be sealing our fate as a nation! This is the last straw! Will you stand up, or will you cow to these thugs?
angry.gif
Top
jofortruth
Posted: Jan 4 2010, 09:01 PM


Administrator


Group: Admin
Posts: 34,801
Member No.: 1
Joined: 1-May 07



QUOTE
John Hughes
Bloomberg
July 18, 2008

The U.S. Transportation Security Administration will triple the number of devices at airports that can detect bombs under airline passengers’ clothing.
 
The purchase of 80 so-called Passenger Imager machines will bring the total in use next year to 120 at 21 airports, agency spokesman Christopher White said today.

The imagers are produced by L-3 Communications Holdings Inc., OSI Systems Inc.’s Rapiscan unit and American Science & Engineering Inc. The TSA hasn’t yet decided which vendors it will use or how much it will spend, White said in an interview.

Depending on the model, the devices rely on X-rays to show an outline of travelers’ bodies or electromagnetic waves to create an image that looks like a fuzzy photo negative. They are now used as a substitute for being scanned by TSA screeners with handheld detectors.



See the date of this article. They were already putting these bodyscanners in airports. Now that the BRIEF BOMBER comes along they are using it to justify all the scanners they already have in place (testing btw) and to install more and make them mandatory! What's more interesting is that this is part of a UN plan and happening all over the world!
Top
jofortruth
Posted: Jan 5 2010, 12:44 AM


Administrator


Group: Admin
Posts: 34,801
Member No.: 1
Joined: 1-May 07



American Science and Engineering, Inc.
http://www.boston.com/business/articles/20.../11/bizscanner/


Top
jofortruth
Posted: Jan 5 2010, 08:11 PM


Administrator


Group: Admin
Posts: 34,801
Member No.: 1
Joined: 1-May 07



Why would anyone submit to these body scans when traveling or going anywhere?

Do you like becoming a slave? With every inch you give the NWO, they will take a mile?

When are you going to say ENOUGH IS ENOUGH???????

When will you tell the NWO Elite, who are behind all of this tyranny, "I will not comply, PERIOD!"


Alex Jones Calls For Mass Resistance To Implementation Of Body Scanners
http://www.prisonplanet.com/alex-jones-cal...y-scanners.html


There comes a time when a man must stand up, and that time is now! This is over the top! If you care about your family, you will stand up to this, and say "NO" "HELL NO"!

Take a look at this!


Attached Image (Click thumbnail to expand)
Attached Image
Top
jofortruth
Posted: Jan 6 2010, 01:03 PM


Administrator


Group: Admin
Posts: 34,801
Member No.: 1
Joined: 1-May 07



Security industry booms amid scanner rush
http://www.prisonplanet.com/security-indus...anner-rush.html
Top
jofortruth
Posted: Jan 6 2010, 02:07 PM


Administrator


Group: Admin
Posts: 34,801
Member No.: 1
Joined: 1-May 07



Dutch to Use Body Scanners - New Technology Will Screen U.S.-Bound Passengers Amid Privacy Concerns
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB126217311115510051.html

QUOTE
In early 2009, the TSA began testing the machines as a primary screening method, replacing walk-through metal detectors.  The move helped prompt more than 30 U.S. organizations, grouped as The Privacy Coalition, to write to Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano voicing objections.

In June, the House of Representatives passed a motion sponsored by Rep. Jason Chaffetz of Utah blocking the TSA from compelling passengers to undergo body scans until privacy issues were resolved.

In recent days, other members of Congress have rejected such calls.



INTERESTING HOW THE UNDERWEAR BOMBER CAME ON THE SCENE AT AN OPPORTUNE TIME FOR THE BODY SCANNER MANUFACTURERS.

They had been testing the scanners in a few airports in the USA since early 2009 (see above), now all they needed was some threat that would fearmonger the people into accepting them. BINGO the idiot appears - BRIEF BOY! Then they start announcing they're going to put them in all major airports, and the manufacturers stocks rise right after the event! HUM!
rolleyes.gif
Top
jofortruth
Posted: Jan 7 2010, 04:37 PM


Administrator


Group: Admin
Posts: 34,801
Member No.: 1
Joined: 1-May 07



Airport Body Scanners - What you need to know!

In Canada this violates the Charter of Rights and Freedom, but they just follow their American buddies and do as they do:(See Comment) rolleyes.gif
http://www.cbc.ca/news/yourview/2010/01/bo...-still-fly.html

QUOTE
Comment:

Call your MP's and protest these illegal scanners, that impose upon your rights!

Clause 8 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms: " Everyone has the right to be secure against unreasonable search or seizure."

Scanner, 'Violates Human Dignity,' Say Civil Rights Canada!

Take a look at this eye opening News Clip as to the purpose and consequences of this heightened full body scan security at airports:
Top
jofortruth
Posted: Jan 7 2010, 05:00 PM


Administrator


Group: Admin
Posts: 34,801
Member No.: 1
Joined: 1-May 07



'Naked' scanner in airport trial
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/8303983.stm

QUOTE
The images will be destroyed straight away, say the authorities

A trial of a scanner that produces "naked" images of passengers has begun at Manchester Airport.

The authorities say it will speed up security checks by quickly revealing any concealed weapons or explosives.

But the full body scans will also show up breast enlargements, body piercings and a clear black-and-white outline of passengers' genitals.

The airport has stressed that the images are not pornographic and will be destroyed straight away.

Sarah Barrett, head of customer experience at the airport, said most passengers did not like the traditional "pat down" search.

At Manchester Airport's Terminal 2, where the machine has been introduced, passengers will no longer have to remove their coats, shoes and belts as they go through security checks.

Ms Barrett said: "This scanner completely takes away the hassle of needing to undress."

Ms Barrett said the black-and-white image would only be seen by one officer in a remote location before it was deleted.

"The images are not erotic or pornographic and they cannot be stored or captured in any way," she said.

Passengers could refuse to be scanned, she added.

"Maybe if I was 18, slim and lovely, I'd take it"

The scanners cost £80,000 each. They work by beaming electromagnetic waves on to passengers while they stand in a booth. A virtual three-dimensional image is then created from the reflected energy.

Ms Barrett said the radiation levels were "super safe".

She said: "Passengers can go through this machine 5,000 times a year each without worrying. The amount of radiation transmitted is tiny."

The Department for Transport will decide whether to install them permanently in about a year's time.

The scanners, made by RapiScan Systems, have already been tried at Heathrow Airport from 2004 to 2008.

A BAA Heathrow spokeswoman said the technology had been "very effective" and the airport operator was considering possible wider use of it in the future.

The scanners are being gradually rolled out at airports across the US, after use in Los Angeles and New York.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comments:

Absolutely disgusting. I would rather be "patted down" than have my images stored for a security guard to see - even if they are destroyed. Big organisations cannot be trusted with information/data etc (government and private sector companies have lost many of our personal details in the post) and this leaves me feeling even more vulnerable in our big brother state. Will they soon add this information and our naked images to our biometric data card?
Z, Birmingham

Absolutely not! What is this country coming to! This is disgusting, a real invasion of our last privacies. To have a picture of someone naked viewed by some unknown person, revolting. To say that the pictures will be destroyed immediately is a nonsense. For a start time and time again the Government has shown that it cannot keep our information secure. With nursery workers taking pornographic pictures of children in their care how long will it be before the airport pictures are being trafficked on the net?
Angela Smith, Annan, Dumfriesshire

If it meant that as passengers we were more secure and also meant we didn't have to go through the added hassle of undressing then I can't see why people would complain, especially given the authorities assurances that the images are destroyed.
Steven Todd, Glasgow

If this speeds up security I cannot see a problem, this is for our own safety!
Julie Harris, Farnham Surrey

Yes, I would mind. I have nothing to hide but I would be unhappy having a x-ray which produced a naked image of me even if it was destroyed straight away. It's just not right.
Hazel, Suffolk

I think it would be very embarrassing to go throughout the scanner. But if it is going to keep us safe from terrorists then it is worth it and essential. I'm sure the person seeing the images will see so many every day that they will not be in the least bit interested in our naked bodies.
Roy Woolnough, Watford

Fantastic idea! With so much terrorism targeted at planes these days, this is necessary and I don't feel like it breaches privacy at all. We shouldn't allow the privacy factor to get in the way of public safety.
Joseph, Scunthorpe, England

I would not be keen on this and it is not right for someone to be looking at intimate images of children. This system should not get the go ahead.
Roy Lavender, Bilston

This is an absolute abuse of power. It is completely unacceptable and makes people feel violated. What a disgrace! If snooping into every other part of our lives is not enough now they have to snoop on our bodies too! I think government has gone power mad!
Mike Brown, Corby, Northamptonshire

I'd rather have this, than be fully searched. If it speeds up check in, and makes travelling less stressful, bring it on. I think because of the amount of unnecessary surveillance we appear to be subject to, good ideas get a little too much criticism when they arrive.          Eddie, Edinburgh
Top
jofortruth
Posted: Jan 7 2010, 07:30 PM


Administrator


Group: Admin
Posts: 34,801
Member No.: 1
Joined: 1-May 07



Admitted: Airport Body Scanners Provide Crisp Image Of Your Genitals
http://www.prisonplanet.com/admitted-airpo...r-genitals.html

QUOTE
Apologists’ claim that devices “blurred out” sensitive areas proven fraudulent

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Thursday, January 7, 2010

As part of the gargantuan fraud being peddled by the corporate media in service of the government’s agenda to subject everyone to degrading naked body scans in airports, apologists for the devices claimed that people’s genitals would be blurred out to save embarrassment.

This has now proven to be a fraudulent con designed to keep people in the dark about the fact that the body scanners DO produce crisp images of your naked body and they DO allow TSA thugs to see intricate details of your genitals.

A report from October 2008, when the naked body scanners were first being introduced at Melbourne Airport in Australia, detailed how the X-ray backscatter devices don’t work properly unless the genitals of people going through them are visible.

“It will show the private parts of people, but what we’ve decided is that we’re not going to blur those out, because it severely limits the detection capabilities,” said Office of Transport Security manager Cheryl Johnson.

“It is possible to see genitals and breasts while they’re going through the machine,” she admitted.

In addition, London Guardian journalist Helen Carter writes today that the scanners produce an image which make “genitals eerily visible,” after she attended a trial run at Manchester Airport earlier this week.

The aggressive campaign on behalf of governments and the media to sell the public on invasive body scanners has been accompanied by the reassurance that the devices do not show details of genitals, an obvious attempt to counter the fact that the machines do represent a virtual strip search as well as violating laws against child pornography.

Images accompanying articles about the scanners, as well as TV news reports, blurred out sensitive areas, creating the impression that this is also what officials in airports saw, misleading the public into thinking that their private parts would not be on public display.

Since it’s already been admitted by security officials, as well as personally witnessed recently by newspaper reporters, that the scanners do indeed provide detailed pictures of people’s sexual organs, are Americans going to accept thugs in uniforms staring at their genitals, or are people finally going to say enough is enough and start boycotting the airlines as well as conducting mass protests in resistance to this complete abomination against basic human dignity?
Top
jofortruth
Posted: Jan 7 2010, 08:01 PM


Administrator


Group: Admin
Posts: 34,801
Member No.: 1
Joined: 1-May 07



Top
jofortruth
Posted: Jan 8 2010, 02:01 PM


Administrator


Group: Admin
Posts: 34,801
Member No.: 1
Joined: 1-May 07



Another example of what these body scanners do and how detailed:
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=972_1262283908

Attached Image (Click thumbnail to expand)
Attached Image
Top
jofortruth
Posted: Jan 8 2010, 04:09 PM


Administrator


Group: Admin
Posts: 34,801
Member No.: 1
Joined: 1-May 07



America’s Busiest Airports to Get Body Scanners
http://www.infowars.com/americas-busiest-a...-body-scanners/
Top
jofortruth
Posted: Jan 11 2010, 02:22 PM


Administrator


Group: Admin
Posts: 34,801
Member No.: 1
Joined: 1-May 07



QUOTE
Bill Press
Chicago Tribune
Saturday, January 9th, 2010

“Welcome to the Friendly Skies. Now take off all your clothes.”

Don’t laugh! In the wake of the failed terrorist attempt over Detroit on Christmas Day, it may not be long before those scary words greet you upon arriving at the airport, just before you step into the full-body scan machine.

Today, there are only 40 such machines located, and rarely used, in 19 airports across the country. But, spending $25 million in stimulus funds, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) has already ordered an additional 150 for 2010, and hundreds more are in the pipeline. Once those scanners are in place, every passenger will be required to pass through one or volunteer to be personally groped in a full-body pat down.

There’s no doubt about it; full-body scanners are a gross and unnecessary invasion of privacy. By stepping into that machine, you might as well take your clothes off and parade naked around the security checkpoint.

TSA officials haughtily pooh-pooh privacy concerns. After all, they reassure us, the agent leering at your naked body is hidden away, out of sight, in a room nearby. So what? He’s still leering at your body. Or your wife’s. Or your daughter’s. In fact, in England, use of full-body scanners is considered a violation of child pornography laws, and the machines are banned for children under 18.

Not only that, adds TSA, rules prohibit agents from storing naked images of passengers or sharing them with friends. Oh, really. After their recent screw-ups in Detroit or Newark, can we really trust TSA on anything?

There’s also the question of radiation. While most experts agree the risk is low — ABC’s Lisa Stark reports that rays from a body scanner are 2,000 times less powerful than a typical chest X-ray — any amount of radiation can increase the likelihood of cancer. Which is why many doctors recommend that pregnant women and children, the most vulnerable members of the population, avoid use of the machines altogether.



SO WHEN YOUR GOVERNMENT CRIES ABOUT BEING POOR AND THEY WANT MORE TAXES FROM YOU, REMIND THEM HOW THEY HAVE SQUANDERED YOUR MONEY ON RIDICULOUS THINGS LIKE THIS!

TELL THEM UNTIL THEY LEARN TO SPEND THE MONEY PROPERLY THEY NOW GET FROM YOU, THEY GET NO MORE PERIOD!
rolleyes.gif
Top
jofortruth
Posted: Jan 11 2010, 02:37 PM


Administrator


Group: Admin
Posts: 34,801
Member No.: 1
Joined: 1-May 07



QUOTE
By Jeanne Meserve and Mike M. Ahlers, CNN
January 11, 2010 12:01 p.m. EST

Washington (CNN) -- A privacy group says the Transportation Security Administration is misleading the public with claims that full-body scanners at airports cannot store or send their graphic images.

The TSA specified in 2008 documents that the machines must have image storage and sending abilities, the Washington-based Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) said.

In the documents, obtained by the privacy group and provided to CNN, the TSA specifies that the body scanners it purchases must have the ability to store and send images when in "test mode."

That requirement leaves open the possibility the machines -- which can see beneath people's clothing -- can be abused by TSA insiders and hacked by outsiders, said EPIC Executive Director Marc Rotenberg.

EPIC, a public-interest group focused on privacy and civil rights, obtained the technical specifications and vendor contracts through a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit.

The written requirements also appear to contradict numerous assurances the TSA has given the public about the machines' privacy protections.

"The machines have zero storage capability," the TSA Web site says.

A TSA video assures passengers "the system has no way to save, transmit or print the image."



Video: Disarray at the TSA

Video: Netherlands now uses body scan
RELATED TOPICS
Transportation Security
Terrorism
Air Travel
And the TSA has distributed numerous news releases with similar language as it lobbies for public acceptance of the machines as a less intrusive alternative to pat-downs.

A TSA official who spoke on condition of anonymity because the official is not authorized to speak on the record said all full-body scanners have "strong privacy protections in place" and are delivered to airports "without the capability to store, print or transmit images."

"There is no way for someone in the airport environment to put the machine into the test mode," the official said, adding that test mode can be enabled only in TSA test facilities. But the official declined to say whether activating test mode requires additional hardware, software or simply additional knowledge of how the machines operate.

The controversy arises as the TSA is promoting the machines as a possible way to prevent assaults on U.S. airliners, such as the Christmas attempt on Northwest Flight 253.

About 40 machines are already in use at 19 airports, and the TSA says it will deploy 150 more nationwide this year, while appropriating money for an additional 300 machines for 2011.

"I don't think the TSA has been forthcoming with the American public about the true capability of these devices," EPIC's Rotenberg said. "They've done a bunch of very slick promotions where they show people -- including journalists -- going through the devices. And then they reassure people, based on the images that have been produced, that there's not any privacy concerns.

"But if you look at the actual technical specifications and you read the vendor contracts, you come to understand that these machines are capable of doing far more than the TSA has let on," he said.

The TSA should suspend further deployment of the machines until privacy and security questions are resolved, Rotenberg said.

TSA officials say they have taken sufficient measures to protect privacy.

The TSA officer viewing the image cannot see the actual passenger. No cameras, cell phones or other devices capable of capturing an image are allowed in the room where the image is displayed, according to the TSA. The agency adds that images are deleted from the system after the operator reviews them. And employees who misuse the machines are subject to serious discipline or removal.

Further, the TSA says, the machines are not networked and cannot be hacked.

Celebs share views on body-scanning

EPIC said it is pursuing a lawsuit to obtain additional documents about the machines from the TSA.
Top
jofortruth
Posted: Jan 12 2010, 01:09 PM


Administrator


Group: Admin
Posts: 34,801
Member No.: 1
Joined: 1-May 07



Obama’s TSA Nominee Targets Anti-Government Christians
http://www.infowars.com/obamas-tsa-nominee...ent-christians/


And you thought Obama was a Christian??????? The man is a liar who has done a 180 turn from everything he promised in his campaign. He also has signed an Exe Order to hide his BIRTH CERTIFICATE. What more does a person need to say? (I didn't believe the birth certificate news when I first saw it, but when he signed this Exe Order, he pretty much incriminated himself!)
http://z4.invisionfree.com/The_Great_Decep...6038&st=0&#last

Top
jofortruth
Posted: Jan 12 2010, 01:11 PM


Administrator


Group: Admin
Posts: 34,801
Member No.: 1
Joined: 1-May 07



A List of Articles on the Bodyscanners:
http://www.infowars.com/misc/scanners.html

Top
jofortruth
Posted: Jan 12 2010, 01:28 PM


Administrator


Group: Admin
Posts: 34,801
Member No.: 1
Joined: 1-May 07



PROTESTS:
Pirate Party protests ‘naked’ scanners in their underpants

http://www.infowars.com/pirate-party-prote...eir-underpants/
http://www.thelocal.de/politics/20100111-24493.html

QUOTE
The Local – Germany
January 11, 2010

Scantily clad Pirate Party supporters demonstrated over the weekend at several German airports to show their opposition to controversial “naked” scanners planned for security checks.

Despite the frigid temperatures outside, the protesters assembled nearly naked groups at airports in Berlin, Frankfurt and Düsseldorf on Sunday afternoon. The participants stripped down to their underpants, marching behinds signs that read: “No need to scan us – we’re already naked.”

A statement on the party’s website said they opposed the new security scanners because they threaten the “private sphere and the personal rights of passengers.”

Germany’s data protection commissioner, Peter Schaar, warned officials last week not to rush the implementation of the full-body scanners at airport security stations following a failed terrorist attack in the US last month. Critics are concerned that the devices, which allow security personnel to see through clothing, have not been improved enough to protect passengers’ personal rights.


Attached Image (Click thumbnail to expand)
Attached Image
Top
jofortruth
Posted: Jan 13 2010, 01:29 AM


Administrator


Group: Admin
Posts: 34,801
Member No.: 1
Joined: 1-May 07



PROTESTS:
Nude Protest: Airport Body Scanners in Germany

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZSEf_4F3jk


Top
jofortruth
Posted: Jan 13 2010, 04:54 PM


Administrator


Group: Admin
Posts: 34,801
Member No.: 1
Joined: 1-May 07



EPIC (Electronic Privacy Information Center) Sues & Gets FOIA Documents:
http://epic.org/2010/01/update---epic-posts-tsa-docume.html
http://epic.org/privacy/airtravel/backscatter/

EPIC's lawsuit against DHS: (Gives history of the scanners & Tells of upcoming hearings in Congress Jan 20 & 21, 2010)
http://epic.org/privacy/airtravel/backscat...aint_110309.pdf

Scanners can store images, group says
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/nation...091/actions.jsp

QUOTE
Statement conflicts with U.S. officials

Joel Tiller

Published on Tuesday, Jan. 12, 2010 11:33PM EST
Last updated on Wednesday, Jan. 13, 2010 8:36AM EST

Full-body scanners operating in 19 U.S. airports can store and export captured images, says a U.S. privacy group, contradicting statements by the U.S. Transportation Security Administration.

The revelation came a day after Transport Minister John Baird said 12 full-body scanners will be arriving in airports across Canada this week.

The Washington-based Electronic Privacy Information Center obtained five documents from the TSA, including technical specifications and vendor contracts for Whole Body Image devices, through a freedom of information lawsuit filed last November.

A guide to imaging technology on the TSA's website says: “All machines have zero storage capability.” Similar statements have been made by TSA officials.

“These documents clearly refute what the TSA has told the public about privacy,” said Marc Rotenberg, EPIC executive director.

Among EPIC's key findings is the TSA machine's capability to store, record, and transfer images while operating in “test mode.”

“I'm very skeptical that it's not possible to switch the machine into test mode,” Mr. Rotenberg said. “I would be surprised if these features cannot be enabled on site.”

The documents even reveal details about the TSA's request to potential vendors for a number of hardware specifications, including USB integration, Ethernet connectivity and hard disk storage.

“When they [TSA] tell the public it can't store information ... What are these [specifications] used for? Decoration?” Mr. Rotenberg said.

However, Mathieu Larocque, a spokesman for the Canadian Air Transport Security Authority, said the scanners Canada plans to use will not be able to store captured images.

“Additional hardware is required to enable the storage capacity of images … we have no intentions of purchasing this hardware.”

In total, CATSA will oversee 44 full-body scanners, all of which will use millimetre wave technology – the same technology found in the scanners south of the boarder.

The TSA says it is committed to ensuring the privacy of the travelling public to the greatest extent possible, and claims the technology used in their scanners is part of their “multi-layered” security strategy to stay ahead of evolving threats.
Top
jofortruth
Posted: Jan 13 2010, 10:12 PM


Administrator


Group: Admin
Posts: 34,801
Member No.: 1
Joined: 1-May 07



Top
jofortruth
Posted: Jan 16 2010, 08:03 PM


Administrator


Group: Admin
Posts: 34,801
Member No.: 1
Joined: 1-May 07



Satire: A Message From Transport Canada, a Division of the Department of Homeland Security
http://www.infowars.com/satire-a-message-f...eland-security/




Top
jofortruth
Posted: Jan 26 2010, 12:28 AM


Administrator


Group: Admin
Posts: 34,801
Member No.: 1
Joined: 1-May 07



Hidden Video: Constitutional Lawyer Refuses Body Scanner at Federal Courthouse
http://www.infowars.com/hidden-video-const...ral-courthouse/

QUOTE
The Gig Is Up
January 25, 2010

Gary D. Fielder is a constitutional and criminal lawyer of 20 years. Mr. Fielder has conducted over 350 jury trials, appeared in Federal District Court, and argued before the Colorado Court of Appeals and Supreme Court. After graduating from the University of Texas at Austin, Mr. Fielder earned his Juris Doctorate at the University of San Diego in 1990. Mr. Fielder grew up in Eagle River, Alaska, and now lives in Denver.

Visit Gary’s website to sign up on his newsletter and receive details about his national tour called Sovereignty: The people’s first right and last stand.

Gary was mandated by the court to represent his client in the courthouse but he refused to be scanned by a body scanner under constitutional grounds that since he was not leaving the city and traveling between jurisdictions and since he had not violated any laws he had a right to not be scanned.  The court deputies were surprised to see any dissident reaction since most people mindlessly follow orders and assume that is is legal.  It isn’t.  It was not approved by the people and Mr. Fielder demanded that they allow him to enter the courthouse.

He was told by deputies that he had a “choice” not to be scanned and could leave but the truth of the matter is he didn’t have a choice, it was mandatory to be scanned in order to enter the courthouse. Mr. Fielder believes his right to privacy was more important and that consent must be given by the person being scanned since it stores nude photographs of the people who enter the machine.  Since consent was not given, the deputies had no right to scan the attorney but unlike travel situations where jurisdiction falls into the hands of the Federal Authorities, they had to let Mr. Fielder into the courthouse.

The deputies don’t realize that it is not a choice to go to court, it is required.  They were to comply with his request, not the other way around.  This police state style event is exactly what Mr. Fielder specializes in as a constitutional lawyer and he believes his interpretation of the situation should be thoroughly examined.  Others are urged to do the same as Mr. Fielder.

Video recorded by WeAreChangeColorado.org
Top
jofortruth
Posted: Feb 5 2010, 02:15 PM


Administrator


Group: Admin
Posts: 34,801
Member No.: 1
Joined: 1-May 07



Congressman: Naked Body Scanners Are Just About Harassing Passengers
http://www.prisonplanet.com/congressman-na...passengers.html
Top
0 User(s) are reading this topic (0 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:
« Next Oldest | Real ID /NSC / Homeland Security /FEMA/ Law Enforcement/NORTHCOM/Army on American Soil/TSA Airport travesties | Next Newest »
zIFBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Free Forums with no limits on posts or members.
Learn More · Register for Free

Topic OptionsPages: (4) [1] 2 3 ... Last »



Hosted for free by zIFBoards* (Terms of Use: Updated 2/10/2010) | Powered by Invision Power Board v1.3 Final © 2003 IPS, Inc.
Page creation time: 0.3897 seconds | Archive