100 Naked Body Scans Get Posted Online

[pale paladin]

[citation][nom]distanted[/nom]My solution is to hire only hot men and women for the pat down job and let the passenger pick his or her groper. Hell, you wouldn't even have to pay them, they could work for tips alone.[/citation]

This could work. I'm all for it. ever had a hot female doctor do your physical?. I have . it wasn't uncomfortable at all.

 

[gm0n3y]

I wouldn't really care if pictures of me were released. That being said, I'm still opting out of the scans on principle. Before all of the security increases of the last decade planes still managed to complete their flights 99.999+% of the time without being hijacked. Our freedoms are being eroded while the fear mongers tell us we should be scared of flying even though we're still vastly more likely to be killed driving to the airport than on the flight.

 

[WarraWarra]

So how can any one tell what this is in between all that blubber ?

http/www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1330327/Airport-security-breach-naked-body-scanner-images-leaked-online.html
http/i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/11/16/article-0-0C1A1364000005DC-242_468x286.jpg

This one is more revealing "likely a USA person":
http/www.iill.net/search/full+body+scan+tsa

This can almost be art "likely non USA person":
http/www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/11/flashback-feds-saved-35000-nude-scans-florida-courthouse/

I would pay not to have to look at these, imagine how mentally scar'd the TSA employees must be after 5 of these, will turn any normal human into a recluse / no more S*X person:
http/www.uncoverage.net/2010/11/is-that-you-100-supposedly-deleted-naked-body-scans-leaked-online/

LOL look at the guys sock in his pants LMAO even X-ray can see it is a fake bulge ROFL.

 

[WarraWarra]

[citation][nom]pale paladin[/nom]This could work. I'm all for it. ever had a hot female doctor do your physical?. I have . it wasn't uncomfortable at all.[/citation]

LOL this is the USA, hot left back in the late 80's early 90's when Bill Clinton's revenge became normal Monika Suck-you Under-Podium.
There might be something good looking on the East coast but might still be mentally unstable. Just look at the porn and blubber on news channels, this is not the HOTNESS EU so best of luck.

No mentally unstable chick / person will touch me no matter hot hot she thinks she is or tries to look.
PS> I travel a lot overseas, yes outside the "Whole World of the USA" and I see hot that would make you melt not dull boring Pamela Anderson ugly, I mean really really nice hot chicks, yes I have walked into a few lamp post outside USA, inside USA the history channel is more interesting than 99% of the women here.

 

[maestintaolius]

[citation][nom]ReggieRay[/nom]You may want to reconsider that. If the commie loving left get away with this Nazi stuff at airports they already said they want it to move into other areas. Before you know it you will be strip searched to enter your local Mall.The left always preaches freedom but are the ones who always are the first to try and take away your freedoms.[/citation]
Uh, both the left and right share equal blame for this nonsense. Of course, I would argue that the so called 'small gov't republicans' are anything but after they're elected. The main difference between the two parties at this point is what parts of gov't they want to make bigger and which liberties they tap dance on while doing it.

[citation][nom]kookoo88[/nom]lmao, I thought he meant the band too.Mark Twain said: "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."Right now, we're giving up a lot of essential liberties, IMO[/citation]
It was Ben Franklin actually (although Mark Twain could have said it too, but then he was plagiarizing ).

 

[f-14]

meh 5 years from now all the airline employees and federal workers will be dying from cancer due to over exposure of radiation. just watch. you can laugh but in the town i went to school at there is a nuclear plant and 24 sets of twins and all of parents works at that nuclear plant. of all the nuclear plant employees families there were 38 sets of twins and 5 sets of triplets. it's not coincidence as major universities have been studying this effect at every nuclear plant for decades. only reason i knew about this was because one of the sets of twins i knew were in my grade in high school and they had extremely high IQ's and were studied by researchers most of the time they were in class when they weren't annoyed enough by everyone to skip class after the first 5 minutes, col.

 

[mr_tuel]

with all this amphasis on airline security, what about freight trains, and cars? Those aren't scrutinized, so what stops a terrorist from detonating a bomb that is 'hidden' inside a common minivan outside (or inside) of a choice target?

 

[ekim]

Do you people have routine physicals by a physician or nurse? The small amount of radiation is much smaller than a chest x-ray, it's probably less than the exposure you get on an aircraft during significant solar activity... Safe is completely relative -> frequent high altitude flyers may have a reasonable concern. Occasional traveler - "not"! Stuff the modesty, I think for most the exposure (pun intended) is worth the risks.

 

[fracture]

Yes, these machine don't have the capability to store any images. Oh, they can store images for evaluation purposes? Um, well, we turn them off at the airports.

LoL, yeah uh huh.

 

[descendency]

Rule 34. Clearly.

 

[descendency]

[citation][nom]fracture[/nom]Yes, these machine don't have the capability to store any images. Oh, they can store images for evaluation purposes? Um, well, we turn them off at the airports.LoL, yeah uh huh.[/citation]
In order for them to be displayed to a screen, they must be loaded into memory (typically video memory). Anyone with enough programming ability could copy the video memory to a disk. Presto. illegal backup.

 

[L0g1c]

They should privatize security already. Only a market is going to find a sane balance between security and traffic.

 

[milktea]

While we're being scanned at the airport, would scan us for any possible cancer? That would save us a trip to the doctor office.

 

[gm0n3y]

[citation][nom]L0g1c[/nom]They should privatize security already. Only a market is going to find a sane balance between security and traffic.[/citation]
So we can trust a corporation more than the government?? I mean I distrust the government (especially the US government) as much as the next person, but that is just ridiculous. Why not privatize law enforcement, the military, etc? Oh wait, they pretty much have in some instances and now those corporations have way too much power.

 

[Guest]

Here's a solution to all the controversy over full-body scanners at the airports:

All we need to do is develop a booth that you can step into that will not X-ray you, but will detonate any explosive device you may have hidden on or in your body. The explosion will be contained within the sealed booth.
This would be a win-win for everyone. There would be none of this crap about racial profiling and the device would eliminate long and expensive trials.
This is so simple that it's brilliant. I can see it now: you're in the airport terminal and you hear a muffled explosion. Shortly thereafter an announcement comes over the PA system, "Attention standby passengers we now have a seat available on flight number..."

 

[maestintaolius]

[citation][nom]gm0n3y[/nom]So we can trust a corporation more than the government?? I mean I distrust the government (especially the US government) as much as the next person, but that is just ridiculous. Why not privatize law enforcement, the military, etc? Oh wait, they pretty much have in some instances and now those corporations have way too much power.[/citation]
The corporation providing said security has much more to lose than a gov't entity that you can't take to a civil court. The airline would stand to lose money to death benefits towards civil settlements and employee life insurance not to mention the cost of the airplane itself, the gov't stands to lose nothing.

 

[lightbulbsocket]

[citation][nom]L0g1c[/nom]They should privatize security already. Only a market is going to find a sane balance between security and traffic.[/citation]
The only private security that makes sense is to make sure everybody has a weapon before they board the plane.

The other kind just ensures that whatever company they chose to "keep us safe" keeps asking for (and probably receiving) more leeway to make us "safer" by searching us in increasingly more asinine places and in increasingly more invasive ways to "protect our security".

 

[lightbulbsocket]

[citation][nom]maestintaolius[/nom]The corporation providing said security has much more to lose than a gov't entity that you can't take to a civil court. The airline would stand to lose money to death benefits towards civil settlements and employee life insurance not to mention the cost of the airplane itself, the gov't stands to lose nothing.[/citation]
Whatever corporation they chose would likely get legal immunity similar to the legal immunity vaccine manufacturers get against anyone that gets injured by their vaccines. And we still wouldn't be any safer than we are now. Not that we're any more or less safe than we ever have been.

 

[Guest]

Man, I really hate the "It's a privilege, not a right" arguments. The whole point of this goddamn country is that people have certain INALIENABLE rights. That means that, except when said rights would conflict with other people's same rights, no one should be able to take them away. Being asked to waive those rights in exchange for certain services can possibly be justified, particularly for small and/or very specific purposes, but large companies providing an internationally and widely-used service requiring you to waive those rights is absolutely ridiculous, and it's disgusting to see people defending it. Yes, you probably could find alternatives to public airlines a lot of the time, but the point is we shouldn't have to.

 

[gm0n3y]

[citation][nom]maestintaolius[/nom]The corporation providing said security has much more to lose than a gov't entity that you can't take to a civil court. The airline would stand to lose money to death benefits towards civil settlements and employee life insurance not to mention the cost of the airplane itself, the gov't stands to lose nothing.[/citation]
I'm not really a firm believer in the effectiveness of corporate accountability or of the magic of 'market forces' to make a company care about its customers rights and freedoms. At least the government is 'supposed' to care and some people actually do. Corporations are not supposed to care, they are supposed to make money and going out of the way of profit can actually get you sued since a CEO's sole responsibility is to raise the price of their stock.