TSA Body Scanners Can Store, Transmit Images

I dont see the big fuss over all of this..you cant even see much anyways. Almost like an xray, except not very detailed and with skin.

Surprise!!!! I have a new pic for your facebook wall.

How is this any different from the people that watch security cameras in department stores?
If anything this is less invasive, and its for national security too..

The Training/Scanning switch is not relevant. If it is capable of storing, it is capable of storing, period.
I'd be willing to sacrifice this particular bit of privacy before boarding a plane if:
A- It is foolproof
B- It is faster than a pat down.

Now if there is ONE incident involving a picture of a passenger making its way to the Internet, or a couple involving TSA officers laughing at a scan, the whole thing could be compromised.

I really hope the operators of those understand what's at stake.

If a body scanning system requires you to blur out the faces of the people they scan, the system is too sensitive and should not be used.

Out with the TSA porn machines!!

http://www.prisonplanet.com/images [...] 110top.jpg

What they should really do is give the passenger an option of which method of screening they want to go through. If the individual is comfortable enough with the full body scanner, then they have the option to use it.

If the invididual would prefer to preserve their privacy and spend more time going through the pat-down/metal detector process, they should have the option to do so.

TSA should be terminated. There is no need for security anyway. You cannot prevent an air plane bombing, but you can easily piss off every passengers with the an APPEARANCE of security.

This is the 21st century...Storage and network features are standard for almost any computer based equipment.

This is expected

With the way things seem to go in ten to twenty years we'll find out these things give you cancer.

What about all the radiation exposure to frequent flyers? Is this not a concern?!

I predict a 100% increase in teenage boys applying for TSA jobs.

No way is there enough detail to recognize anybody so who cares if your naked image shows up on YOU TUBE! Only the cross dressers might get embarrassed.

Of course it has storage and transmit capability. They would most likely use the data during any prosecution where something was discovered.

haha you beat me to it by one minute! Of course X Ray radiation is bad and high levels or continuous will pwn people with cancer!

Preserve their privacy....riiiiiiiight. I would rather have a scan than have some stranger put thier hands all over me. Which is less intrusive???? Everyone will have thier opinion, so like you said, give people the option. All TSA needs to do is have 2 unpleasent enormous guards (thinking Andre the Giant here) standing right next to the scanner. Another TSA agent: "What would like, fast scan or nice pat-down by big-bear here?"

Like you said, everyone will have their own opinion. I would rather have my daughter go through a pat-down than a machine that can see straight to her body. There is a huge difference between pat-down and groping.

But unwanted behavior that the TSA is lying to the public and to our elected officials about. Neither we or our elected officials should allow the lies to stand.

Neither has the equipment been proven safe to use on people. They glibly state that it is safe but this safety has not been tested. It is only being inferred from other data which is not applicable to the machines in question. Neither the "backscatter x-ray" machines nor the "TeraHertz" machines have gone through rigorous testing for safety of use on people. So they are saying "there is no evidence that this is bad for humans so it must be okay." This attitude is wrong and is just like the chemical companies who gave us DDT, Dioxins, Bisphenol A, and PCB's amont other wonderful things, while they said the same thing and then fought every study and attempt to find out if these things were harmful.

See http://www.emfinterface.com/ for information about what is known so far that the TSA is lying to us about.

So the scanners use a computer that's been manufactured in the last 1-2 decades? My Gateway 2000 had all of this!

Can you identify an individual from these images? No.
Then, why bother?

Yes. That is why they had to blur out the images.

There is another concern that I have since it's a given now that the TSA is lying to us.

How can we take their word that what they have shown people is all that the machines are capable of showing? Might there be another "switch" which would allow a much better picture than what they are showing to the public and our elected officials?

Depending on the type of whole body imaging system it is either less radiation than what you get on the plane itself if it's an X-ray based scanner or none if it's a millimeter wave based system.

I've got mixed feelings about this which interfere with common sense and practicality.

These machines were all built before there was an actual market for them, hence their quick deployment to airports in various countries. The "crotch bomber" happens just days before the security measures invoked after 9/11 were set to expire, which "justifies" extending these measures and expanding them by bringing in these devices, which can't detect the materials used in this instance. These machines were ordered about a year ago, even though they pose privacy and health concerns.
Add in the fact that this technology can basically create a 3d biometric scan of people and that "surprise" all one has to do to see a full nude of these pictures is to use the "invert image" command in pretty much any photo editing software - no more ghostly images that are shown, rather full color nude pictures of everyone who is scanned.
So - we have expensive devices that don't work for what they are being introduced to do, have health concerns and damage DNA, can be used as a source of pornography, can transmit and store data, and can be used to generate biometric data on an entire person in 3d.
Bottom line - the "crotch bomber" may have thought he was working for Al Qaeda, but it would seem he was working indirectly for the manufacturers of these machines and the control freaks that want this level of invasion of privacy normalized.
This has little if nothing to do with airline security folks. The crotch bomber had no passport, was flagged as suspicious by airport security and was still allowed on a plane.
I smell false flag all over this.
Motive - money for "security" companies and power for national security organizations, another blow against human rights and dignity, and previously increased security measures set to expire.
Means - the guy waltzed through security which implies he had high - level help along the way, (and not from people hiding in caves in a war zone).
Opportunity - using a dummy that thought he was going to martyr himself for a cause and manipulating him into going ahead with a plan that was destined to backfire (literally) to justify bringing in the end result which is the introduction of these machines and continuation of other "security measures" - the continued warrantless wiretaps, the continued monitoring of all emails and more.

Try having some knowledge about what you're talking about instead of just speaking thru your rear.

These system have already been in service before the most recent bombing and didn't need the bombing to push them, they can in fact detect the type of explosive that was used, the health concerns are nill (no more than any technology you use in your everyday life) and you can't just invert the image to get a naked picture of a person, got any other consperacy theories?

well they have to PROVE you had a bomb/drugs on you some how, duh

Looks like I won't be going to the states for a long long time... I refuse to be part of their false sense of attempts to security.

I knew they were lying when I watched them on Mainstream Media say "We don't have the capability to save or transmit images to a permanent location. The images get instantly deleted once the next person moves through." The image has to store somewhere to even be viewed in the first place

This is an invasion of privacy. It does not matter if its low resolution, it does not matter if it can store images, it does not matter if it can transmit images.

I do not deserve to be strip searched, virtual or otherwise. Im not a criminal and dont deserve to be treated like one.

If i had a choice to ride an airplane with a 2 hour security check with pat downs, full body scanners and all that other shit....

Or a quick metal detector pass through plane where people rights arent trampled on. Id take my chances with the no hassle flight any day.

To paraphrase Benjamin Franklin, 'those who would give up liberty for a little security, deserve neither"

What is not an invasion of privacy.

Metal dector.
Explosives 'sniffer'(like a smoke detector but for known explosive compounds)

I wouldnt mind walking through either.

But full body scan, pat down, all that other crap is BS. It doesn't make you any safer, it just wastes money, and invades your privacy.