Welcome to the Net Muslims Forums.
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 27
  1. #1
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    10,290

    Default Virtual Strip search scanners at Airports

    Airport body scanners 'virtual strip searches'

    Date: April 19 2008

    Dan Weikel, Los Angeles
    TRAVELLERS at Los Angeles and New York airports will be searched using a new scanner that peers through their clothes and creates an image of the person's body, federal officials announced.
    The sophisticated technology, called millimetre wave imaging, might prove to be a more effective way to check travellers for guns, knives, bombs and dangerous materials than pat-down searches. But it has raised questions by privacy and civil rights advocates, who say the screening process is invasive and amounts to a virtual strip search.
    "I don't think people are really aware of just how accurate and detailed the images are of their naked body," said Peter Bibring, a staff lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union in Los Angeles. "We need to make sure there are good safeguards. The temptation is great not to follow procedures when a celebrity or someone well known is involved."
    Millimetre wave pictures are white and dark gray. Although somewhat fuzzy, they are detailed enough to reveal such features as breasts and body anomalies.
    Transportation Security Administration (TSA) officials said the agency planned to buy at least 30 more devices this year for other airports. It unveiled the "whole body imaging" machine at the Delta Airlines terminal at the Los Angeles airport on Thursday.
    Another millimetre wave machine was rolled out at John F. Kennedy International Airport in New York. The devices, part of a pilot program involving major airports, are being tested under actual conditions.
    "This will allow us to enhance our security at LAX (Los Angeles airport)," said Nico Melendez, a TSA spokesman. "Imaging devices are not a brand new security tool, but they are a brand new security tool for airports."
    Travellers randomly selected for secondary screening will go through the scanning device, which uses electromagnetic waves to create an image from energy reflected from the human body. The device costs about $US150,000 ($A160,000).
    If passengers don't want to go through the scanner, they can opt for other screening measures, including pat-down searches. Signs in the checkpoint area will advise travellers of this option. During the process, a person walks into a large portal and assumes two positions for the scan. A three-dimensional image later appears on a computer screen checked by a security official in a separate location. The process takes a minute or two.
    To protect a person's privacy, officials said that security officers review the images in a booth about 20 metres away and are unable to see the passenger in question. The faces of those scanned are blurred, and the images cannot be stored, copied or printed, officials said.
    According to the TSA, about 80% of travellers scanned during recent tests at Sky Harbour International Airport in Phoenix opted for the imaging machine instead of a pat-down search. Mr Melendez said there have been no complaints from passengers since testing began at Sky Harbour late last year.
    Civil-rights and privacy advocates say the images are detailed depictions of the naked human body and should be tightly controlled to prevent them from being posted on the internet, sold to tabloid publications or misused in other ways.
    LOS ANGELES TIMES

  2. #2
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    10,290

    Default Strip search scanners at US Airports

    Chaffetz defends run-in with TSA

    September 24th, 2009

    SALT LAKE CITY -- Utah's freshman congressman on Thursday defended a run-in with security at Salt Lake International Airport.

    Republican Congressman Jason Chaffetz admitted he got frustrated and even used an obscenity, but he thinks airport security was out of line, not him.

    It all revolves around a machine that checks for concealed bombs or weapons under a passenger's clothes. Passengers who don't want their whole body scanned can bypass the machine and go through a metal detector and full-body pat down instead. But 99.6 percent willingly get scanned.

    "The security is good, and it's for my protection. I feel that way about it, and so I don't mind it at all," said frequent flyer Dick Crossett.

    Statistics show less than 1 in 200 try to avoid the revealing scans.

    "I believe it's invasive, and I think there are other methods we could use. So, it's not a line I choose to go through," a flight attended named Monica told KSL News.


    Utah Rep. Jason Chaffetz said he was just trying to exercise that right when a security guard told him to change lines.

    "They did not make it optional; and when I told them I didn't want to do it, they started treating me as though I was some sort of criminal or something, giving me the third degree," Chaffetz said.

    The Transportation Security Administration issued a written statement that said: "This incident will be reviewed." It also reiterated that a body scan "is always 100% optional" and it's "an important tool to mitigate known threats."

    Chaffetz said he flies roughly every four days and has never before been singled out for extra screenings. He said he wonders if one reason could be retaliation--either because of his legislative history with the screening process, or because just days before the disagreement on Monday he'd voted against a bill that would have given union status to the Transportation Security Administration.

    After a pat down and full clearance, Chaffetz said things escalated when he asked to speak with a supervisor, identifying himself as a congressman.

    "Then, trying to get the supervisor's name and ID number, the supervisor said to me, "We know exactly who you are,'" Chaffetz said. "At that point, yeah, I said ‘B.S.' and kind of spelled it out. And, uh, I was frustrated."

    But unnamed sources told the Deseret News Chaffetz was obnoxious and escalated the situation himself. He allegedly threw his business card at a security worker and grabbed the supervisor's ID badge.

    "Hey, let's roll the tape. That absolutely, positively did not happen," Chaffetz said.

    Videotape of the incident does exist. The TSA is studying it and hasn't said yet whether they will release it.




  3. #3
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    10,290

    Default

    Airport Body Scans Reveal All

    By Jeremy Hsu - 01 April 2009

    New airport security scanners could become a popular alternative to body searches, but have also prompted some privacy concerns.

    Whole-body imaging technologies can see through clothing to reveal metallic and non-metallic objects, including weapons or plastic explosives. They also reveal a person's silhouette and the outlines of underwear.

    That hasn't stopped security officials from implementing them. The U.S. Transportation Security Agency (TSA) started using whole-body imaging at six airports this year, and plans are in the works to expand it to airports in several more U.S. cities later this year.

    The TSA has tested two technologies, including "millimeter wave" (MMW) technology which bounces radio-frequency waves off people to construct a 3-D image within a few seconds. TSA also temporarily leased four "backscatter" units which use X-ray scanning, although the MMW method is currently faster.

    Early this year, TSA began implementing MMW as a primary screening technology next to metal detectors at airports in San Francisco, Miami, Albuquerque, Tulsa, Salt Lake City and Las Vegas.

    Airports in 20 U.S. cities, such as JFK in New York City and LAX in Los Angeles, have used or plan to use MMW tech this year. Other countries have also begun using or evaluating MMW for airport screening, including the UK, Netherlands, Japan and Thailand.

    The MMW and backscatter scans intentionally blur facial features, and the security officer viewing images sits in a remote location where he or she cannot identify the passengers, said Lara Uselding, a TSA spokesperson. She added that the systems also delete scanned images after the viewings, and have "zero storage capability."

    That has not stopped privacy advocates from asking how much passengers may unwittingly reveal in whole-body imaging.

    "Body scanners produce graphic images of travelers' bodies and are an assault on their essential dignity," said Barry Steinhardt, director of the ACLU's Technology and Liberty Project. "The safeguards announced by the TSA do not convince us that the technology is acceptable, and we question the supposed voluntary nature of these scanners."

    TSA pointed out that passengers can currently choose between the MMW screening and the more traditional body search conducted by a security officer with a wand. The new screening tech actually proved popular in testing conducted in January 2009.

    "More than 99 percent of passengers selected for Millimeter Wave screening opted to use the technology instead of the traditional pat-down procedure at Los Angeles International Airport," Uselding said. "We saw the same percentage for use at JFK with MMW."

    A body scan that leaves no record might be less invasive than background searches which look through computer records containing personal passenger information, said Bruce Schneier, chief security technology officer for British Telecommunications, who has published several books and testified on security issues for the U.S. Congress.

    However, Schneier raised two main issues: whether security officials are doing the right thing to address security issues, and whether they're doing it right. His concern is that high-tech airport screening has become too focused on specific threats.

    "I dislike security that requires us to guess a target and tactic," Schneier told LiveScience. He added that airport screening represents the last line of defense against potential threats, whereas spending more money on intelligence gathering has benefits whether terrorists are targeting an airport or shopping mall.

    "Security is a tradeoff," Schneier said. "Every dollar we're spending on airport security is a dollar not spent someplace else."





    Being Stripped Virtually

    http://blog.lebanesetag.com/2008/06/get-ready-for-being-stripped-virtually.html











  4. #4
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    10,290

    Default Manchester Airport starts trial of 'strip-search' scanner

    Manchester Airport starts trial of 'strip-search' scanner

    Airline passengers flying from Terminal 2 at Manchester Airport today will be asked whether they have any objection to being strip-searched — although they will not have to undress.

    The airport is launching a year-long trial of a controversial X-ray scanner that allows security staff to see through travellers’ clothes, in effect rendering them naked.

    Such are the sensitivities surrounding the latest advance in aviation security that staff have been told not to call the machine a “body scanner” but instead to refer to “imaging technology”.

    As passengers pass through the machine, hands on either side of their heads, a ghost-like outline of their naked bodies, including private parts, are conveyed to screeners sitting in another room.

    There is no hiding place for breast enlargements, piercings, hip replacements and, more importantly, knives or guns.

    If the trial is successful the £80,000 machines could be adopted in airports across the UK, replacing the familiar “pat down” searches where passengers are asked to remove coats, jackets, shoes and belts before passing through the scanner.

    It is already being adopted across America, where the Transport Security Agency last week ordered 1,000 scanners from Rapiscan Systems.

    Managers at Manchester Airport acknowledged that the machines highlight breasts and genitals but insisted that the resulting images were neither pornographic nor erotic. But, as one member of staff said: “It does not leave much to the imagination."

    Sarah Barrett, the airport’s head of customer experience, said: “Our passengers tell us that they don’t like being patted down by security staff at airports but they understand that it is a necessary part of keeping them safe.

    “Imaging technology offers a potential alternative but we know that some people see it as controversial. That is why we are running a trial.

    “The process is completely anonymous. We can assure the public that it does not allow security staff to see passengers naked. The image produced is a black and white, ghost-like outline of an individual’s body without any distinguishing features such as hair or facial features, making it impossible to recognise people but simple to detect concealed threats.”

    Airport staff are sensitive to passengers with religious or ethnic objections. As a prelude to the trial the way the scanner works was explained to Faruk Ali, the airport’s Muslim chaplain.

    Ms Barrett said: “He advised us that 99 per cent of people would not have a problem with this because the images are not pornographic or erotic but simply a mild X-ray.”

    The machine has also been passed by the National Radiological Protection Board. One dental X-ray is said to be the radiological equivalent of 20,000 scans.

    Passengers flying from the airport yesterday said they would be happy to take part in the trial if it meant getting through queues faster.

    Ged Brennan, 37, a gas worker from Liverpool flying to Singapore, said: “It has just taken me 20 to 25 minutes to go through security. Anything that makes the process faster would be welcome.”




    Watch the news video clip:


    http://itn.co.uk/dc6bde155ea34a1df3e1deca5a43cb05.html




    'Naked' scanner in airport trial

    13 October 2009

    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.

    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.



  5. #5
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    10,290

    Default

    Are Digital Strip Searches Coming Soon To Every Airport Near You?


    The Christmas Day airplane bombing attempt has renewed the debate over full body scanners at airports. The Transportation Security Administration in recent years has tried out a series of “whole-body imagers” to look for threats that typical metal detectors can’t find. These systems are the only way that smuggled explosives, like the one officials say was brought on the Christmas flight, can be reliably found[Wired.com].

    Privacy advocates are calling the full body scanners a “digital strip search” (take a look at this TSA image of a full body scan and you’ll get the idea). But some security advocates say that either patting down every passenger or taking full body scans are the only options to ensure certain dangerous items are kept off airplanes.

    Right now there are 40 full body scanners in 19 different U.S. airports. Only 6 airports use them for primary screening, the rest are used for follow-up searches. These scanners use millimeter-wave sensors that emit radio frequencies. By measuring the differences in the radiated energy, the scanner produces detailed 3-D images that resembles photo negatives. TSA has also ordered 150 similar scanners, at about $170,000 each, that use backscatter X-ray technology, after the completion of a successful pilot project.

    TSA says privacy concerns are unwarranted since facial features (and other body parts?) are blurred out before the screening officer, who is in a separate room, sees the images. A senior U.S. air security source acknowledged the ongoing controversy over using the high-resolution body scanners that can show breast enhancements, body piercings and genitals. Full-body scanners currently in use in the U.S. have been set on a “politically correct” lower resolution that prevented screeners from seeing the outlines of genitals, the source said[New York Daily News].Supposedly, the images will be permanently deleted immediately after screening.

    Last June, the House of Representative voted 310 to 118 to oppose the use of full body scanners as a primary means of screening passengers. This doesn’t mean the issue is dead however, as President Obama has ordered a system-wide review on all screening procedures.

    Related Content:
    80beats: Editing Goof Puts TSA Airport Screening Secrets on the Web
    DISCOVER: A Wing and a Prayer: The U.S.’s Crumbling Air-Travel Infrastructure
    80beats: Researcher Discovers Effective Profiling; Says It’s More Trouble Than It’s Worth






  6. #6
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    10,290

    Default

    Obama Pledges Another $215 Million For Virtual Strip Search Scanners

    Paul Joseph Watson - Tuesday, February 2, 2010

    The Obama administration has announced that a further $215 million dollars will be spent on installing virtual strip search naked body scanners, meaning the devices will be in no less than half the nation’s airports by next year, but the historical record clearly shows that the scanners are a completely illegal violation of human rights.

    “The $215 million proposal to acquire 500 scanners next year, combined with the 450 to be bought this year, marks the largest addition of airport-security equipment since immediately after the 9/11 attacks. There are only 40 body scanners in a total of 19 airports now,” reports USA Today.

    Privacy advocate Marc Rotenberg pointed out that the scanners were yet another expensive instrument of the war on terror being used against the American people.

    “We’ll have another Homeland Security Department program for the war on terror used almost exclusively on Americans,” said Rotenberg, executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center.

    As we have highlighted, the naked scanners are a boon for the military-industrial complex and people like former Homeland Security chief Michael Chertoff, who vigorously promoted their use in the aftermath of the staged underwear bombing, having a huge financial stake in seeing them rolled out nationwide.

    Despite the seemingly breakneck speed at which airports are rushing to adopt the scanners, some are proving to be less enthusiastic.

    Durham Tees Valley Airport in the UK has refused to commit to installing the scanners despite the British government ordering all airports to adopt them before the summer season.

    The fact that the scanners are nothing less than a virtual strip search has been played down by the government and the media due to the potential for legal fights that could see the devices banned as a breach of human rights.

    Despite official denials that the images produced show details of genitalia, journalists who have investigated trials of the technology have reported that details of sexual organs are “eerily visible”.

    Indeed, as we have previously highlighted, when the scanners were first introduced at Australian airports in 2008 it was admitted that 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 Melbourne Airport’s Office of Transport Security manager Cheryl Johnson.

    Attempts to keep this under wraps by lying about the images produced are an effort to head off challenges to the legality of the devices. Historically, civil lawsuits where an individual has been strip searched by a member of the opposite sex have proven to be successful in North America.

    Courts have consistently found that strip searches are only legal when performed on a person who has already been found guilty of a crime or on arrestees pending trial where a reasonable suspicion has to exist that they are carrying a weapon. Subjecting masses of people to blanket strip searches in airports reverses the very notion of innocent until proven guilty.

    Barring people from flying and essentially treating them like terrorists for refusing to be humiliated by the virtual strip search is a clear breach of the basic human right of freedom of movement.

    The legal foundation of the naked body scanners needs to be undermined and eroded by lawsuits before they are rolled out on the streets, as has already been proposed by major western governments.


  7. #7
    Administrator Array
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    21° 30' N, 39° 10' E
    Posts
    4,554

    Default

    The irony of the 3D scanners is that Muslims are going to opt to get pat down by a same-gender TSA agent. That means that the only people getting scanned are non-Muslims. Of course, once the non-Muslims see that Muslims aren't going through the scanners and are opting for the pat-down method, you may see some non-Muslims opting for this method. If, eventually, everyone opts for this method, it would render the scanners obsolete.

  8. #8
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    10,290

    Default

    True and yet many muslims may still go through it thinking they don't have the option of pat down, at least that's the impression security will try to give. Once more and more muslims hear that it is haraam then that would be a big movement to opt out.

  9. #9
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    10,290

    Default

    Digital STRIP SEARCH – Inverted Airport Body Scanner Image Shows NAKED Bodies In Full Living COLOR!

    January 10, 2010

    A quick look at what is/will be available for the airport screeners to view…in the name of safety, of course.

    http://www.infowars.com/inverted-body-scanner-image-shows-naked-body-in-full-living-color/

    The full body scanners that President Obama last night authorized to be rolled out in airports across the country at a cost of over $1 billion dollars not only produce detailed pictures of your genitals, but once inverted some of those images also display your naked body in full living color.

    And you dont need to be a graphics wizard using a $600 software suite like Photoshop to pull off the trick inverting a photo is a simple process that takes one click and is an option available even in the most BASIC image editing software.

    We were sent examples of the process by readers and then tested it for ourselves to confirm that simply inverting some of the pictures produced by the body scanners creates a near-perfect replica of a naked body in full color.

    It is important to stress that this is a low resolution image. Airport screeners will have access to huge high definition images that, once inverted, will allow them to see every minute detail of your body.

    The inversion trick doesn’t work for all the sample images produced by body scanners, but with or without its application, every image will still show details of your sexual organs. Even without being inverted, the images already BREAK CHILD PORN LAWS in the UK.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/jan/04/new-scanners-child-porn-laws

    Reassurances that airport screeners wont be able to save the images will provide little comfort to parents who know that the crystal clear image of their naked son or daughter being ogled by a TSA thug can merely be snapped with a handheld camera for their enjoyment later.

    Apologists for the scanners have routinely described the images they produce as ghostly or skeletal in an effort to downplay the intrusion of privacy they really represent.

    As we reported yesterday, claims that the body scanners did not provide details of genitals were DISPROVEN after a London Guardian journalist who was present at a trial for the machines earlier this week reported that the devices produce an image which make genitals eerily visible.

    http://www.bild.de/BILD/news/bild-english/world-news/2009/12/31/pregnancy-body-piercings-genitals/what-can-naked-scanners-really-see.html

    German Security advisor Hans-Detlef Dau, a representative for a company that sells the scanners, admits that the machines, show intimate piercings, catheters and the form of breasts and penises.

    http://www.bild.de/BILD/news/bild-english/world-news/2009/12/31/pregnancy-body-piercings-genitals/what-can-naked-scanners-really-see.html
    (Source of original photo, try inverting it yourself…)

    Indeed, as was admitted when the scanners were first being rolled out over a year ago, they don’t function properly if areas of the body are blurred out.

    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.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1077800/Airport-admits-strip-search-body-scanners-WILL-people-naked.html

    It will show the private parts of people, but what weve decided is that were 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.

    TV news reports have been deliberately misleading viewers by blurring out faces and genitals of people in images produced by the scanners. When it comes to the real thing, your sexual organs and those of your children will be on full display to officials sat alone in back rooms, and with a simple inversion trick, your daughters' naked body, in full living high definition color will be there to be enjoyed by screeners.


  10. #10
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    10,290

    Default

    Body scanners can store, send images, group says

    By Jeanne Meserve and Mike M. Ahlers, - January 11, 2010

    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."

    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.

    EPIC said it is pursuing a lawsuit to obtain additional documents about the machines from the TSA.


  11. #11
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    10,290

    Default

    Exposed: Naked Body Scanner Images Of Film Star Printed, Circulated By Airport Staff

    Paul Joseph Watson
    Prison Planet.com
    Tuesday, February 9, 2010

    UPDATE: Scannergate: Facts Contradict Heathrow Claim That Naked Images Can’t Be Printed

    Claims on behalf of authorities that naked body scanner images are immediately destroyed after passengers pass through new x-ray backscatter devices have been proven fraudulent after it was revealed that naked images of Indian film star Shahrukh Khan were printed out and circulated by airport staff at Heathrow in London.

    UK Transport Secretary Lord Adonis said last week that the images produced by the scanners were deleted “immediately” and airport staff carrying out the procedure are fully trained and supervised.

    “It is very important to stress that the images which are captured by body scanners are immediately deleted after the passenger has gone through the body scanner,” Adonis told the London Evening Standard.

    Adonis was forced to address privacy concerns following reports that the images produced by the scanners broke child pornography laws in the UK. When the scanners were first introduced, it was also speculated that images of famous people would be ripe for abuse as the pictures produced by the devices make genitals “eerily visible” according to journalists who have investigated trials of the technology.

    However, the Transport Secretary’s assurances were demolished after it was revealed on the BBC’s Jonathan Ross show Friday that Indian actor Shahrukh Khan had passed through a body scan and later had the image of his naked body printed out and circulated by Heathrow security staff.

    “I was in London recently going through the airport and these new machines have come up, the body scans. You’ve got to see them. It makes you embarrassed – if you’re not well endowed,” said Khan, referring to how the scans produce clear images of a person’s genitals.

    “You walk into the machine and everything – the whole outline of your body – comes out,” he said.

    “I was a little scared. Something happens [inside the scans], and I came out. Then I saw these girls – they had these printouts. I looked at them. I thought they were some forms you had to fill. I said ‘give them to me’ – and you could see everything inside. So I autographed them for them,” stated Khan.

    The story was carried by Yahoo News under the headline “Shah Rukh signs off sexy body-scan printouts at Heathrow”.

    Khan’s reference to “girls” with printouts of his naked body scan can only refer to female airport security staff responsible for processing the images produced by the scanners, “professionals” who are supposed to instantly delete the images, according to Lord Adonis.

    The revelation that airport security staff are completely abusing any notion of the professionalism promised by authorities by printing out and circulating images of naked body scans should set alarm bells ringing, especially in light of the fact that such images of minors break child pornography laws. British authorities have made it mandatory for travelers to submit to the naked body scanners when asked and have overturned previous rules that prevented under 18’s from passing through the devices.

    Within days of the devices being introduced at Heathrow, staff have abused their professionalism and printed out naked scans of a famous actor for their own titillation.

    We were promised all along that the body scanners “increased privacy” because they were only accessible to a single staff member who had no personal contact with the passenger taking the scan, in addition to the assurance that the images could not be saved and were instantly deleted. It in fact turns out that airport staff have been saving, printing and circulating naked body scans in complete violation of these supposed guarantees.

    Furthermore, we were told that the identity of the person undergoing the virtual strip search would also be kept private. The fact that Heathrow employees must have known that the actor was about to take the body scan in order to print out copies of the image also proves this claim to be a total fallacy.

    The abuse of the naked body scan images in this instance is a total violation of every data protection law in the UK. Far from treating the story in a comical manner, Khan should be filing a very expensive lawsuit and preparing for a successful and lucrative outcome.

    In the meantime, the revelation that the naked body scanner images are being freely printed out and circulated by airport security staff should prove to be the death knell for plans on behalf of governments worldwide to institute the scanners on a widespread basis.

    Courts have consistently found that strip searches are only legal when performed on a person who has already been found guilty of a crime or on arrestees pending trial where a reasonable suspicion has to exist that they are carrying a weapon. Subjecting masses of people to blanket strip searches in airports reverses the very notion of innocent until proven guilty.

    Barring people from flying and essentially treating them like terrorists for refusing to be humiliated by the virtual strip search is a clear breach of the basic human right of freedom of movement. Security experts agree that such scanners would not even have stopped the incident that has been exploited to justify their widespread introduction – the Christmas Day underwear bomber.

    Not only have the scanners proven to be a total violation of privacy, but major international radiation safety groups are now warning of the health risks they pose.

    Despite governments claiming that backscatter x-ray systems produce radiation too low to pose a threat, the Inter-Agency Committee on Radiation Safety concluded in their report that governments must justify the use of the scanners and that a more accurate assessment of the health risks is needed.

    Pregnant women and children should not be subject to scanning, according to the report, adding that governments should consider “other techniques to achieve the same end without the use of ionizing radiation.”

    “The Committee cited the IAEA’s 1996 Basic Safety Standards agreement, drafted over three decades, that protects people from radiation. Frequent exposure to low doses of radiation can lead to cancer and birth defects, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,” reported Bloomberg.


    source: LINK


  12. #12
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    10,290

    Default

    Bosom bombers: Women have explosive breast implants

    Authorities alarmed by possibility of surgically placed explosives

    February 01, 2010

    LONDON – Agents for Britain's MI5 intelligence service have discovered that Muslim doctors trained at some of Britain's leading teaching hospitals have returned to their own countries to fit surgical implants filled with explosives, according to a report from Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin.

    Women suicide bombers recruited by al-Qaida are known to have had the explosives inserted in their breasts under techniques similar to breast enhancing surgery. The lethal explosives – usually PETN (pentaerythritol Tetrabitrate) – are inserted during the operation inside the plastic shapes. The breast is then sewn up.

    Similar surgery has been performed on male suicide bombers. In their cases, the explosives are inserted in the appendix area or in a buttock. Both are parts of the body that diabetics use to inject themselves with their prescribed drugs.

    The discovery of these methods was made after the London-educated Nigerian Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab came close to blowing up an airliner on Christmas Day with explosives he had stuffed inside his underpants.

    Hours after he had failed, GCHQ – Britain's worldwide eavesdropping "spy in the sky" agency – began to pick up "chatter" emanating from Pakistan and Yemen that alerted MI5 to the creation of the lethal implants.

    A hand-picked team was appointed by Jonathan Evans, the head of MI5, to investigate the threat. He described it as "one that can circumvent our defense."

    Top surgeons who work in the National Health Service confirmed the feasibility of the explosive implants.

    In a report to Evans, one said:

    "Properly inserted the implant would be virtually impossible to detect by the usual airport scanning machines. You would need tosubject a suspect to a sophisticated X-ray. Given that the explosive would be inserted in a sealed plastic sachet, and would be a small amount, would make it all the more impossible to spot it with the usual body scanner."

    Explosive experts at Britain's Porton Down biological and chemical warfare research center told MI5 that a sachet containing as little as five ounces of PETN when activated would blow "a considerable hole" in an airline's skin which would guarantee it would crash.


    comment:

    And the justification for the forced use of nude scanners, begins... especially for Muslimahs and specifically from the countries mentioned!

  13. #13
    Administrator Array
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    21° 30' N, 39° 10' E
    Posts
    4,554

    Default

    So now Al-Qaeda, which is a group of Afghan shepherds, has their own plastic surgeon. Really?

    Joseph Farah is such an idiot.... and he knows it, too.

  14. #14
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    10,290

    Default

    Their own plastic surgeons, pilots, people in military and other gov't positions in the west, and bigger network than some intelligence agencies. It's amazing what uneducated simple sheep herders can accomplish without the budget or recruiting power of the top agencies and most powerful nations. I don't know who is more stupid, the people behind the news or the people reading and believing these fairy tales.

  15. #15
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    10,290

    Default

    Now Mobile Devices Will Scan Your Naked Body On The Streets

    Paul Joseph Watson - Friday, January 8, 2009


    Naked body scanners are being readied to go mobile and scan you on the street, at football games and any other event where masses of people are congregated, according to a leaked paper written by Dutch authorities.

    As we have been warning all along, the tyranny now being metered out at airports was always intended to be rolled out onto the streets, with mobile metal detectors already being stationed at various transport hubs in the UK in the name of stopping knife crime.

    Now Dutch police have announced that they are developing a mobile scanner that will “see through people’s clothing and look for concealed weapons”.

    According to a confidential document, “The scanner could first be used as an alternative to random body searches in high risk areas. The mobile detector would enable the search to be carried out more quickly and would only be used on people suspected of carrying concealed weapons,” reports Dutch News.nl.

    The device would also be used from a distance on groups of people “and mass scans on crowds at events such as football matches.”

    “The biggest challenge is making it portable and ensuring it can carry out a scan in seconds,” Giampiero Gerini, a professor at Eindhoven University, told the paper.

    The aim is to develop and deploy the device within three years. With police in major American and British cities already carrying out random searches of innocent people under routinely abused terrorism laws, mobile scanners are likely to be added to their arsenal, especially if people have been trained to accept their use as routine in airports.

    Three years ago, leaked documents out of the Home Office revealed that authorities in the UK were working on proposals to fit lamp posts with CCTV cameras that would X-ray scan passers-by and “undress them” in order to “trap terror suspects”.

    “The questions are when is this a useful addition to security and when does it become unduly intrusive and worrying to the public?” said Professor Paul Wilkinson, a terrorism expert.

    Since everything that we see being installed at the airports is now gradually being introduced on the streets, how long will it be before mind-reading devices that scan individuals for behavioral psychology, now being discussed for use in airports, are stationed on every major street corner?

    The technologies now being prepared not just for the airport, but for our everyday lives, are far more frightening and technologically advanced than anything George Orwell wrote about in 1984.


    comment:

    Wearing hijab/niqab/jilbab or any other clothes is useless if you are living in these countries. These people can see you with and without clothes and can take pictures. With how much they hate Islam and Muslims, you can be sure these pictures will end up on the internet (especially porn sites).

    How much is your (and your women folks') modesty worth? Is it worth living in these lands?

  16. #16
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    10,290

    Default

    Muslim women who refused to take 'naked' full-body scan are barred from Manchester to Pakistan flight

    By Daily Mail Reporter - 3rd March 2010

    Two Muslim women have become the first passengers to refuse to subject themselves to controversial 'naked' full body airport scans, it emerged today.

    The pair - who security officials insist were selected at random - opted to miss their flight to Pakistan and forfeit tickets worth £400 each rather than be screened.

    One of the women refused to go through the full-body scanner at Manchester Airport on religious grounds while her companion also declined for 'medical reasons'.

    The women were travelling together to Islamabad when they were selected to pass through the controversial security screen after checking-in at Terminal Two at the airport.

    An estimated 15,000 people have already passed through the scanners, with the pair the first passengers to refuse a scan.

    Both told airport staff they were not willing to be scanned. They were warned they would not be allowed to board the Pakistan International Airlines flight if they refused.

    The pair decided they would rather forfeit their £400 tickets and left the airport with their luggage.

    The £80,000 scanners were introduced at Heathrow and Manchester airports on February 5.

    The X-ray machines allow security staff to see a 'naked' image of passengersto show up hidden weapons and explosives, but it has attracted criticism for also showing clear outlines of passengers' genitals.

    Manchester Airport confirmed the passengers had refused to be scanned but said it had received no complaint from the women.

    However, civil liberties campaigners say the incident could form the basis of a legal test case to challenge the use of the Rapiscan device in airports.

    Alex Deane, director of campaign group Big Brother Watch, said the organisation would represent the women if they wished to challenge the decision in court.

    He said: 'People shouldn't have to sacrifice their health, their faith, their dignity, or their privacy in order to fly.

    'People with health and religious concerns shouldn't be forced to go through these scanners if they have good reason not to. Foolishly, the government has ignored both issues and ignored privacy concerns to boot - they are in the wrong on this.'

    There is one Rapiscan scanner in use in a trial at Manchester Airport's terminal two, which has seen 15,000 people pass through it.

    A further two devices - one each for terminals one and three - have been delivered and are set to be operational within the next month.

    The scanners have been criticised by the human rights group Liberty and the government's own Equality and Human Rights Commission.

    Only selected passengers are scanned. Security staff say they are chosen at random and not according to race, religion or ethnicity.

    Councillor Afzal Khan, who was Manchester's first Asian lord mayor, said the vast majority of Muslims believed that any privacy concerns should be outweighed by ensuring they are safe when flying.

    He said: 'Hundreds of Muslim passengers have gone through without a problem. While I appreciate people's concerns for privacy, these steps are necessary for our safety and security.'

    A Manchester Airport spokesman said: 'Two female passengers who were booked to fly out of Terminal Two refused to be scanned for medical and religious reasons.

    'In accordance with the government directive on scanners, they were not permitted to fly.

    Last month, Transport Secretary Lord Adonis stressed that an interim code of practice on the use of body scanners stipulated that passengers would not be selected 'on the basis of personal characteristics'.

    Two weeks ago, a week after the scanners were introduced at Manchester and Heathrow airports, Islamic scholars in the U.S. said Muslim travellers should not pass through the scanners because they violate religious rules on nudity.

    The Fiqh Council of North America issued a fatwa, or religious ruling, warning Muslims not to go through the scanners.

    ‘It is a violation of clear Islamic teachings that men or women be seen naked by other men and women,’ read the order. ‘Islam highly emphasises haya (modesty) and considers it part of faith. The Quran has commanded the believers, both men and women, to cover their private parts.'

    In the U.S., there are now 40 scanners in 19 airports and could be as many as 450 by the end of the year.

    The powerful council of ten scholars that issued the fatwa is affiliated with the Islamic Society of North America.


    comment:

    There is nothing random about these so called random selections. Ask the Muslims who are always selected "randomly" out of so many non-Muslims. Muslims don't believe privacy can be outweighed for the naked scanner, the boot licker Afzal Khan has to say that to keep his job. Muslims and other people went through the scanner because they were lied to that the scanner doesn't reveal anything. These women should pursue a lawsuit instead of accepting this injustice. This perversion has to stop or they will have to choose between not leaving the country or submit to the naked scanner.

  17. #17
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    10,290

    Default

    Airport worker scans colleague

    Victim accidentally strayed into full-body scanner

    Published: March 25, 2010


    London: A security worker at London's Heathrow Airport has received a police warning and faces disciplinary action over claims he ogled a female colleague using a full-body scanner, officials said yesterday.

    The 25-year-old worker made lewd comments after his colleague Jo Margetson, 29, mistakenly strayed into the scanner, which can see through clothes to produce an image of the body, the Sun newspaper reported.

    The case is believed to be the first of its kind since the full-body scanners were rushed into service at a number of British airports.

    They are now being rolled out at airports across the world.

    Details of the incident at Heathrow's Terminal 5 on March 10 emerged on the day lawmakers said concerns that the scanners were intrusive had been overblown.

    Margetson told the Sun she had been "traumatised" by what had happenedand had informed police and her bosses at the airport's operator BAA.

    "We treat any allegations of inappropriate behaviour or misuse of security equipment very seriously and these claims are being investigated thoroughly," said a spokeswoman for BAA.

    "If found to be substantiated, we will take appropriate action."

    A Metropolitan Police spokesman said officers had been informed of the allegation and "a first instance harassment warning has been issued to a 25-year-old man".

    Opponents of scanners have argued since their introduction that they risked breaching individuals' rights to privacy. Britain's Equality and Human Rights Commission has already said they might be breaking discrimination and privacy laws.

    "For every official caught ogling like this, there are plenty more eyeing up law-abiding travellers," Alex Deane, director of the Big Brother Watch campaign group, told the Sun.

    comment:

    They know the naked scanner shows everything and they are unwilling to go through it or seen in it by anyone yet they tell everyone else to go through it.

  18. #18
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    10,290

    Default

    Media Lies by Omission: Biased survey over-inflates public support for airport scanners

    Richard Sawyer - Sott.net - 15 Apr 2010



    © Unisys
    Imagine it, make it up, publish it, sell it. Done.

    "Deception by an omission of the truth is as bad as a lie."
    Jennifer Chiaverini

    The mainstream media was quick to publicise the findings of a survey that showed widespread public support for the global drive to install 'naked' full-body scanners at airports.

    Articles such as Sky News: UK Holidaymakers Back Use Of Full-Body Scanners and Agence France-Presse: Opinion poll: US anti-terror too lax, uncritically repeated the report's findings without questioning the reliability of the survey or mentioning the conflict of interests held by those in the security industry who stand to profit from rolling out these dangerous machines.

    There is one glaring omission from these and the many media reports that published 'news' articles based on the Unisys press release. That is who Unisys is, their connections with government, military, Homeland security, the Transportation Services Authority (TSA) and how they profit from airport security technologies. The failure of the mainstream media to report the true source and motives behind this survey is a clear example of how they lie by omitting the most important facts.

    The survey generated headlines in Austrailia, New Zealand, America and the UK. All with similar sweeping joyous news of approximately 80% of air travelers from these countries who just can't wait to get zapped and show their privates to security guards in order to catch their flight.

    Reading the triumphant headlines, you'd be forgiven for believing the incredible turnaround in public support for invasive technology that has generated many serious concerns, including: One only has to dig a little deeper into who is responsible for this survey to discover the profit-driven agenda of the company Unisys. No surprises, it supplies products and services to support the implementation of increasing security systems at airports worldwide.

    Who is Unisys?

    From the Unisys Website:

    For more than 50 years, our federal government clients have trusted Unisys to help them support their mission-critical programs. When it comes to protecting your assets, data, systems, and citizens, we deliver the best combination of industry and subject matter expertise - every time. Governments around the world trust Unisys to help them solve their business problems through systems that optimize the organization and secure the enterprise.

    A Unisys press release on the same day as the survey results were announced, illustrates clearly the need for Unisys to gain acceptance for increased airport security to maximise its revenue: "Unisys Next Generation Airport Passenger Security Solution Delivers Enhanced Security for Air Travel Consumers Worldwide"

    New solution builds on Unisys experience with advanced biometric technologies to enhance security, speed passenger processing time and reduce costs [...]

    Drawing on the company's experience with the aviation industry and advanced biometric-based security solutions for governments and commercial organizations, the new Unisys solution will integrate the various stages of the air passenger experience with a biometric component to uniquely identify each passenger. The end-to-end solution covers the key touch points of air travel: from electronic boarding passes, to boarding plane, to passing through immigration, to baggage collection.

    "Travelers around the world are being squeezed by a growing number of critical but costly and inconvenient airport security procedures that are taking the joy out of traveling," said Terry Hartmann, vice president, identity and credentialing global practice, Unisys. "With the technologies we have today, air travel doesn't have to be such a difficult experience. Unisys has extensive experience applying advanced biometric technology to address the most demanding identification challenges, and we look forward to helping airports, airlines and immigration agencies make better use of these technologies to bring a new level of convenience and efficiency to air travel."

    Some facts about Unisys' operation show some interesting connections and paint a picture of a company that uses corrupt lobbyists to win government contracts. It has been accused of swindling the TSA to maximise revenue and it is an organisation who cares little for its American employees:
    • Unisys clients are typically large corporations or government agencies, and have included various branches of the U.S. military, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), numerous airports, the General Services Administration, U.S. Transportation Security Administration and Internal Revenue Service
    • Unisys operates the world's largest RFID network for the U.S. military, tracking 9 million containers yearly to 1,500 nodes in 25 countries. It also created the universal identification card for citizens of South Africa.
    • In 2003 and 2004, Unisys paid influential lobbyist Jack Abramoff $640,000. Abramoff raised $100,000 for Bush's 2004 campaign representing clients lobbying the White House, including Unisys Corp.
    • In January 2006, Abramoff pleaded guilty to five felony counts for various crimes related to his federal lobbying activities. The lobbying activities of Abramoff and his associates are now the subject of a large federal investigation
    • In October 2005, the Washington Post reported that the company had allegedly over-billed on the $1 to 3 billion Transportation Security Administration contract for almost 171,000 hours of labor and overtime at up to the maximum rate of $131.13 per hour including 24,983 hours not allowed by the contract. Unisys denied any wrongdoing
    • In 2009 Richard Marcello, president of technology, consulting, and integration solutions at Unisys said "We were able to eliminate a whole bunch of actually U.S.-based jobs and kind of replace them with two folks out of India "
    Sound like a company that is genuinely concerned about helping travelers? Or more like one of the many that will employ a wide range of tactics to generate profits irrespective of the ethics?

    The actual report of the survey in question can be downloaded from Unisys and shows that the telephone survey collated it's information from questions loaded with bias: issue: which of the following statements describe your willingness to sacrifice some privacy for enhanced personal security and convenience when you travel by air?

    There are emotive and assumptive terms used in the above statement that (even without knowing exactly how the questions were framed) help explain the results that the media propagated:

    Some Privacy? Is 'some' privacy sacrifice an accurate reflection of allowing total strangers to view images of you and your children naked?

    Enhanced Security? Is personal security actually enhanced when reports inform us of damming evidence on the ineffectiveness of this technology?

    "Authoritative claims that officials at the [UK] Department for Transport and the Home Office have already tested the scanners and were not persuaded that they would work comprehensively against terrorist threats to aviation.".

    Convenient? The gradual introduction of increasing layers of airport security over the last ten years HAS had the effect of making travel extremely inconvenient. There has been a carefully stage-managed succession of over-hyped and unsubstantiated terror threats. Whether it be shoes, liquids or underpants, each has been followed by new inconvenient and ineffective security procedures. None of these procedures are necessary and are simply excuses to implement increasingly invasive measures which use expensive technology.

    If the survey question was more accurately worded perhaps it would read:

    issue: To board an aircraft, which of the following statements describe your willingness to allow naked images to be taken of you through radiation-emitting procedures with health risks so that technology companies can make huge profits?

    The results would be rather different, but as we know, the media shies away from reporting anything that doesn't encourage the public to accept their taxes being used to profit the shareholders of companies in the 'Airport Security Industrial Complex' like Unisys.

    Comment: Update: One of our forum members provided some further information:

    The poll was actually done by Newspoll (in Australia) at least which is partly owned by Murdoch's News Corp. The survey results were touted far and wide through Fox, News etc.

    It appears Unisys collated the numbers. Only 8360 people were interviewed in 9 countries, 1200 were polled in Australia.

    The US survey was done by International Communications research. One other Unisys survey was done by Lieberman Worldwide whose CEO Arnold Fishman sits on the AeroVironment corp which manufactures small drone aircraft.

    Unisys I would say gets an undergrad to throw the numbers in a small database and "Voila" instant news through the News network.

    The Australian Privacy Foundation has come to the same conclusions.


  19. #19
    Administrator Array
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    21° 30' N, 39° 10' E
    Posts
    4,554

    Default

    Exposed: Naked Body Scanner Images Of Film Star Printed, Circulated By Airport Staff

    Claims on behalf of authorities that naked body scanner images are immediately destroyed after passengers pass through new x-ray backscatter devices have been proven fraudulent after it was revealed that naked images of Indian film star Shahrukh Khan were printed out and circulated by airport staff at Heathrow in London.

  20. #20
    Member Array
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    10,290

    Default

    Digital STRIP SEARCH – Inverted Airport Body Scanner Image Shows NAKED Bodies In Full Living COLOR!


    TV news reports have been deliberately misleading viewers by blurring out faces and genitals of people in images produced by the scanners.

    When it comes to the real thing, your sexual organs and those of your children will be on full display to officials sat alone in back rooms, and with a simple inversion trick, your daughters' naked body, in full living high definition color will be there to be enjoyed by screeners.

    More @ http://www.infowars.com/inverted-body-scanner-image-shows-naked-body-in-full-living-color/

    *Warning: above link contains nude image of female body scanned and inverted.






    Comment:

    Wearing hijab/niqab/jilbab or any other clothes is useless if you are living in these countries. These people can see you with and without clothes and can take pictures. With how much they hate Islam and Muslims, you can be sure these pictures will end up on the internet (especially porn sites).


    How much is your (and your women folks') modesty worth? Is it worth living in these lands?


 

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •