I think it is much ado about nothing so long as the scan hides the identity of the person being scanned is secure and kept non-visible to the public.

The operators would very quickly find these pictures humdrum. We happily submit to X-rays and other similar graphics in the hands of professionals and to me this falls into the same category. Just get used to it. Better that having someone grope around (pat downs) and better than being blown up with a undetected bomb in the underwear.

Hopefully while they are at it, such a scan could identify an internal bomb as well as pick up swallowed drugs in prophylactics etc and kill two birds with one stone. I haven't heard of anyone trying an inserted bomb, surgical or otherwise, but don't see why it wouldn't be feasible for someone crazy enough to try. They are usually brainwashed nut cases to begin with so its worth the effort to head it off.

I see all these comparisons with Israel, but Israel has about ten airports in use. We probably have more traffic through one of our busier airports per day than they have through all of theirs.

If they'd give me more leg room, they could scan and pat me down all they want.

Has anyone doing all the bitching looked at the full body scan pictures? If you wear tight pants, they are going to reveal about as much as the scans will. Even if someone were to save a picture of you and put it on the Internet, no one could tell who it was.

Nothing works like success.

BTW Doesn't Israel manage some of its' own airlines security in foreign countries?

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/nov/27 ... y-20101128

Israeli firms see a global market for their anti-terrorism know-how

The nation is moving aggressively to turn domestic security technology into one of its biggest exports.

November 27, 2010



BTW they gave the cruise missile and flying drone advancements.

I looked up some statistics:

Number of airline passengers in USA in 2009 - approximately 770 million

http://www.bts.gov/press_releases/2010/ ... l#table_01

Number of international airline passengers in ISRAEL in 2009 - approximately 10.5 million

http://www.cbs.gov.il/www/yarhon/q3_e.htm

Y'know what one can do with,

Statistics. Oh my!

How about if could calculate a "per capita targeting"?

How many targets does the Israeli passenger have pinned on his plan of arriving safely as opposed to and from there evaluate security effectiveness.

Question: If YOU were held captive by terrorist and it was going to require violent action to free you - given no negotiations -

Whose forces would you wish lead the operation?

Russian?

German?

French?

American?

Israeli?

Canadian, eh?

Etc.

Moi

They would have to kidnap me in my home

...

moi621 (imported) wrote: Mon Nov 29, 2010 8:56 pm Question: If YOU were held captive by terrorist and it was going to require violent action to free you...

[/I]

marines, big muscular marines with short haircuts, camo gear and big guns.

There's a potential health hazard in all radiation. This goes beyond the thread, but the use of electronic gizmos is out of control, and millions of us are bombarded all day, every day. The cancers will show up years from now. Like cigarettes in the 1950s. When we're sure, it will be too late.

The government wants us to walk through the scanners. If everyone insisted on a pat-down, there'd be boarding lines lasting for hours. Personally, I don't care about being seen through a scanner or being felt up. Taking my shoes off and on is hard for me, and I already felt violated by that. I feel the same about this new policy as I did about the shoes: it's an empty gesture, undertaken to show the people the government is "doing something" about their security. I don't feel significantly more secure as a result. Does anyone else? If so, the policy could be defended. As it is, it just looks like clumsy politics.

I don't think the scanners will pick up anything inside the body, so terrorists could put explosives in their mouth, thick woman's hair(?), or rectum. And what about luggage or air freight, such as the recent packages from Yemen? I've read that explosives in the right plastic or ceramic coverings won't be spotted by x-rays or scans, so they could be checked in baggage, etc. The point is that inventive terrorists can always find a way, so why go to such lengths to block only a few avenues?

There's a bigger question: why worry so much about planes? Despite 9/11, terrorists needn't focus on planes. Bombs can go off in any crowded place, as they have all over the world - restaurants, subways, trains, stadiums, etc. Why not the Super Bowl? A terrorist on US soil, with bomb-making supplies, could strike anywhere. Bombs could also arrive on freighters and ships. So why this obsession with planes? Because of 9/11 and other incidents, we're being stupidly reactive.

Also, the US has virtually open borders. Terrorists can cross from Canada, come ashore by boat, or cross from Mexico. There's no way to police many thousands of miles of border. We all know what the policy is on border security. Even if the Administration wanted to make it a priority, which it doesn't, we couldn't stop terrorists from sneaking in. Again, so why the fuss about airports?

Many terrorists have been captured here and abroad, often before they can do harm. Yesterday's news from Oregon is a good example. We catch them by an aggressive intelligence, surveillance, and undercover program. We monitor e-mails and phone calls between the US and countries harboring terrorists. We have informants and undercover agents in US communities likely to harbor terrorists. We watch and listen, using profiling. That's what works, and it's worked repeatedly. In recent terror attacks that have succeeded, such as the Fort Hood massacre, clear evidence of a threat was reported, but overlooked for political reasons.

The scanning controversy is much ado about nothing. It's just a way of making the security effort visible, while the real work is done elsewhere. I'm just sorry the politicians have to make their demonstration so intrusive and annoying.

Trick question on the test.

What is the safe level of radiation?

Answer: Zero

They try to catch you on safe level and allowable limits.

Moi

See my avatar

moi621 (imported) wrote: Tue Nov 30, 2010 1:13 am Trick question on the test.

What is the safe level of radiation?

Answer: Zero

They try to catch you on safe level and allowable limits.

Moi

See my avatar

When I last looked at the geiger counter, it showed here about 13-20 micro roentgens/hour. More, if you move to some parts of the city (you know, all granite and stuff).

I mean, there is always some background radiation. Just avoid extra/unneeded exposure.

Another trick question.

What is the most frequent disease caused by radiation?

The answer: Radiophobia

This is all for our protection, right? So why scan/frisk the pilots?

There is absolutely zero reason why the guy behind the stick needs to be invasively frisked or scanned. If the pilot really wanted to take the plane out, he's not gonna use a bomb when he's already got the controls in his hands.

For that matter, neither the molestations or scans will tell you if someone's hidden something up their ass. Hell, as XKCD (http://xkcd.com/651/) put it, your average laptop battery could potentially put a hole in the airplane, and lithium batteries are required to be in carry-on as opposed to being checked. For that matter, fuck it, let them record my phone calls... give the average engineering graduate a $20k Home Depot card and I'm damn sure they could find a way to take out a plane during takeoff/landing from just outside the grounds of the airport. Good luck trying to stop that one.

And the printers being 'test runs'? I don't buy it in the least. I'm sorry, but if you think you've found a loophole in the security procedures, you don't send a handful of test 'bombs' through to see if they make it. You send live bombs on the off chance they do. If they detect the bombs en route, you've freaked the hell out of the natives and tightened security. If they don't detect the bombs, you've succeeded and congrats. What does sending test runs through accomplish but potentially expose your opening?

Quite frankly, it makes no sense whatsoever except as a foreign land version of what happened with the kid in Portland.

All this hoopla around the TSA and the bullshit extra security theatre has taught me is that Joe Average doesn't understand a fucking thing about odds, risks, or percentages. Nobody cares if they're 1,000 or even 10,000 times more likely to be killed by an automobile during their daily lives. They don't even care if they're statistically more likely to be hit by lightning then involved in a terrorist attack on their airplane. You don't see people freaking out and ordering these kinds of scans done before getting into a car, or mandatory lighting rods. You want to worry about shit happening to you? Don't go near the street. You're far safer on the plane, even without invasive scans, than you are on the street driving to or from the airport.

You know what? If you're that worried, pull a Howard Hughes. Lock yourself into a room and never come out again. If you want to be completely safe that's about your only hope. For everyone else, grab a fucking pair and accept that nothing's completely safe.

I'd have a hell of a lot more faith in security, if it weren't for the fact that the last couple people to get through had no business getting anywhere near a plan were EXISTING procedures followed. No return ticket? Flag. Paid in cash? Flag. No luggage? FLAG. Their own goddamn parent called in a warning on them? WTF are you doing letting them near a plane?? Why the hell should I get scanned or molested, if the procedures that are already in place aren't being followed??

And you know what? I'm willing to accept that risk. If my plane, or the plane of a loved one goes down as a terrorist attack, treat the dead like fucking heroes. Give them medals, and don't change a damn thing about security procedures. 50 years ago people were willing to die in horrible conditions, in foreign lands, to protect our freedoms. Now we're not even willing to get on an airplane without cavity searches. WTF???