Who's Getting Rich From The Airport Naked-Scanner Boom?

Mother Jones:

Scan, baby, scan. That's the mantra among politicians at all levels in the wake of the thwarted terrorist attack aboard a Detroit-bound passenger jet. According to conventional wisdom, the would-be "underwear bomber" could have been stopped by airport security if he'd been put through a full-body scanner, which would have revealed the cache of explosives attached to Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab's groin.

Read the whole story: Mother Jones

Comments

[Euranya]

06:02 PM on 01/14/2010

...According to this article, all a terrorist needs to do is hide the explosives in the crack of his arse to avoid detection from these digital strip search machines. So what next? Full cavity searches? What other rights will the American public surrender in the name of fear? Benjamin Franklin said, "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." He was right.

Oh, and isn't it ironic that the leading manufacturer of whole-body-imaging machines is called "Rapiscan?" It should be pronounced "Rape-Scan."

[Beamreach]

09:00 PM on 01/10/2010

The headline should be "Who's getting Cancer?"

[skippyB]

10:09 PM on 01/07/2010

Jenny Craig?

[No2bailouts]

03:47 PM on 01/07/2010

I still believe the US economy & government is a joke that only exists to serve and enrich the already wealthy & well connected.
hat tip to http://iamned-site.blogspot.com/

[Len A]

04:45 PM on 01/07/2010

and your comment serves no purpose.

[CommonTator]

05:24 PM on 01/07/2010

Sure it does.

It highlights the fact that our government is no longer in the business of serving the public.

[AtheistUS]

10:25 PM on 01/07/2010

Have you anything to say on topic?

[Len A]

06:22 AM on 01/07/2010

Detroit Free Press: Privacy advocate changes her stance after ride on Flight 253

http://www.freep.com/article/20100107/FEATURES07/1070453/1318/

[CommonTator]

02:11 PM on 01/07/2010

First of all, this article strikes me as utter garbage.

Secondly, what do you imagine it proves if it isn't?

A muslim woman supposedly changes her stance on privacy, and this somehow proves her original stance was mistaken?

[Len A]

02:39 PM on 01/07/2010

R-I-G-H-T. She's changed her position on both profiling and full body scans after being on this flight, and it strikes you as garbage? You're damn right it proves her original position was mistaken.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hebba Aref has always been an outspoken advocate of privacy rights and opponent of profiling.

Then she flew Dec. 25 on Northwest Flight 253 from Amsterdam, Netherlands, to Detroit and found herself six rows in front of a Muslim man who has been charged in the attempted bombing.

She plans to be sitting in the courtroom at the suspect's arraignment in Detroit on Friday.

And as a Muslim woman, she says she now believes security trumps privacy for air travel.

"I'm always standing up for rights and privacy concerns, but now I hope that body scans will be mandatory," Aref, 27, said Wednesday. "Balanced against national security, it's worth the invasion of privacy. And I acknowledge the fact that there has to be attention paid to Muslims."

Some might remember Aref, a Bloomfield Hills native who now lives in Kuwait, as one of two headscarf-wearing Michigan women who were denied seats behind then-candidate Barack Obama at a rally in Detroit in June 2008.

[Len A]

02:41 PM on 01/07/2010

And apparently she's not the only Muslim woman who has this position: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sabria-jawhar/al-qaeda-not-the-us-is-re_b_412784.html

[Tazru]

05:50 AM on 01/08/2010

BFD

You could use some Professional Counselling, please seek help.

[AtheistUS]

03:54 AM on 01/07/2010

To all fear mongering about health risks:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20100106/us_nm/us_security_airlines_scanners

[patbernstein]

05:12 AM on 01/07/2010

just wait ten years and their will be a new report saying they were wrong, and that they are very dangerous.

[AtheistUS]

10:24 PM on 01/07/2010

You cannot deny that most fear-mongering types here are terribly ignorant about these "X-ray" machines.

[MMLJ]

02:45 AM on 01/07/2010

This is an illegal search,

We are protected by constitution against this very crime.

[Len A]

06:23 AM on 01/07/2010

No you're not.

[CommonTator]

02:05 PM on 01/07/2010

Yes we are.

Ever hear of the 4th Amendment?

[MMLJ]

02:44 AM on 01/07/2010

Can't you people see what's happening?

We are gladly giving up all rights to big brother and the brave new world.

[Len A]

08:06 PM on 01/07/2010

Oh well. It's the times we live in.

[CommonTator]

08:17 PM on 01/07/2010

What does that mean, the times we live in?

I don't believe that any human-perceived motion of the clock carries within itself a charge that determines the quality of life experienced by people during that time.

I believe that it is the words and actions of people living at any time that determine this.

That said, I would argue that it is not "the times we live in," it is the reaction of those in positions of power to events occurring during these times.

And these reactions are subject to change by force of the public will and action.

[Higgs Boson]

02:16 AM on 01/07/2010

I think we just make everyone fly nude.

[theschlag]

10:44 AM on 01/07/2010

and they should make the airplanes see through ..

[Higgs Boson]

02:11 AM on 01/07/2010

That sure looks like a strip search to me. Not much left to the imagination. Don't we have something called the constitution that prohibits this kind of thing ? Where is the ACLU when you need them. To my friend Paul in Portland .... I won't be coming to see you any time soon, I will be damned if I will be subjected to this.

[Len A]

06:23 AM on 01/07/2010

Detroit Free Press: Privacy advocate changes her stance after ride on Flight 253

http://www.freep.com/article/20100107/FEATURES07/1070453/1318/

[CommonTator]

02:17 PM on 01/07/2010

First of all, this article strikes me as utter garbage.

Secondly, what do you imagine it proves if it isn't?

A muslim woman supposedly changes her stance on privacy, and this somehow proves her original stance was mistaken?

[HamletsMill]

01:26 AM on 01/07/2010

Can we take the photo down now? We get the point. It is someone's real private photo, then it is very bad karma for HP to have it up there any longer. It is an invasion of privacy. I am not joking here. I honestly think I may know this person. If it is her, she is a very fine, very spiritual person and this is an invasion of her privacy. It makes me sad to see this here. Please. Take it down.

[CommonTator]

01:34 AM on 01/07/2010

If you may know this person and you believe it would bother her, then I second that request.

[Len A]

09:49 AM on 01/07/2010

Crybabies.

[Stockbroker38]

12:19 AM on 01/07/2010

As a handsome 38-year-old stockbroker and hedge fund manager, I must say these scan pics are hot.

Has anyone seen my brandy snifter?

[ChardinisAngel]

12:19 AM on 01/07/2010

Wasn't it strapped to her waist?

[KarateKid]

12:47 AM on 01/07/2010

That's a SHE? I thought it was an out of shape, middle aged man that Stockbroker hit on.

[ChardinisAngel]

12:15 AM on 01/07/2010

Considering the new trend, what they need is BUM-sniffing dogs.

[Krek]

11:52 PM on 01/06/2010

What a horrible job, having to sit there hour after hour looking at one nude body after another. Considering that these machines are probably going to be installed in countries that can afford them, rich countries with plenty of well-fed (and probably over-fed) people, airport staff will probably have to take shifts on them to avoid being grossed out. A nightmare job if you had a hangover.

[ResearchtheFacts]

12:18 AM on 01/07/2010

I was thinking wouldn't want to be walking through one with less than a perfect body. Wow, this poor lady on the picture with the love handles showing. Isn't this a form of "you need to exercise more" humiliation?

[Stockbroker38]

12:20 AM on 01/07/2010

Tuco, Tuco Ramirez, is that you?

[punk]

11:40 PM on 01/06/2010

The woman in the scanner photo is HOT.

[Gin1234]

11:41 PM on 01/06/2010

It's from the radiation burns.