Slashdot Mirror


New Internal Cavity X-ray Technology for Airports

Thanks to a new type of X-ray scanner unveiled in Australia, annoyed TSA agents won't have to send you to a hospital for a body cavity scan, they can do it in-house. Officials say that more than 4,600 man-hours were wasted last year in hospitals waiting for scans. From the article: "Home Affairs Minister Brendan O'Connor said the scanners would also help innocent travelers. 'The option of an internal body scan will more quickly exonerate the innocent and ensure a minimum of delay for legitimate travelers,' Mr O'Connor said."

308 comments

  1. Uh by jimmerz28 · · Score: 5, Funny

    If the TSA employed more attractive people they wouldn't have to send us away to hospitals for body cavity reports.

    1. Re:Uh by Tharsman · · Score: 1

      Sorry, no matter how attractive, I still wont let anyone near my cavities.

      On the good side, though, this device may allow Airports to capitalize in alternative revenue forms. Now you will be able to opt in, for an additional fee, for a non intrusive colon cancer diagnostic!!!

    2. Re:Uh by Kosi · · Score: 1

      But if they put Jessica Alba lookalikes there, I'd be much more inclined to search her cavities than having it the other way.

      So, the only way to go for me is a strict "no-cavity-search" policy. Fingers and more than a normal level of X-rays enter my ass only for medical or sexual reasons (figure out for yourself which of the two can't be used for sex).

    3. Re:Uh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Fingers and more than a normal level of X-rays enter my ass only for medical or sexual reasons (figure out for yourself which of the two can't be used for sex).

      I'm with you, bro. X-ray anal sex is as hot as it gets!

    4. Re:Uh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its good to see a fellow x-rayphile here on slashdot. Nothing gets us goin like an x-ray, eh. Say no more, say no more.

    5. Re:Uh by Abstrackt · · Score: 1

      Fingers and more than a normal level of X-rays enter my ass only for medical or sexual reasons (figure out for yourself which of the two can't be used for sex).

      I'm fairly sure enough exposure to X-rays can make you sterile so I can see where they would have their uses for sex.

      --
      They say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, but it's not one half so bad as a lot of ignorance. - Terry Pratchett
    6. Re:Uh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds like that could be the beginning of a porn movie, starting with an attractive female TSA agent giving a pat down to a burly dude.

    7. Re:Uh by Plekto · · Score: 2

      Don't give them any ideas.

    8. Re:Uh by Gubbe · · Score: 2

      ... that has a side effect of giving you colon cancer.

    9. Re:Uh by sexconker · · Score: 0

      Sorry, no matter how attractive, I still wont let anyone near my cavities.

      Not even your dentist?

    10. Re:Uh by rouzuki · · Score: 2

      TSA Agent: Well sir I've got good news and bad news. The good news is, you didn't have cancer. The bad news is, you do now.

    11. Re:Uh by ceriphim · · Score: 1

      Yeah that was my hope. Is the efficacy of this scan comparable to a colonoscopy performed manually? Close enough? Could it be made close enough? My girlfriend keeps hassling me to go get checked since I just turned 30, but I also have a trip I'm flying out on Saturday for...

      They could confirm there are no weapons secreted inside my person AND no precancerous polyps!

    12. Re:Uh by Kosi · · Score: 1

      I'd rather have a vasectomy if I'd ever want a perfect and durable contraception. IIRC you even can let them lace up the cords instead of severing them, with a certain chance to be reversible. I would have too much fear that other things than sperm production get damaged with that X-rays.

    13. Re:Uh by hairyfeet · · Score: 2

      Sorry but when she breaks out the 10 inch "scanner wand" with the straps I'm afraid I'm gonna have to change the channel there bud.

      Seriously though how much longer are we gonna keep wasting money on this security theater bullshit? The Israelis aren't doing this crap and they have a hell of a lot more threats to deal with than we do. As Bruce Schneier pointed out with all their "enhanced security" bullshit they still miss 70% of knives,30% of guns, and 60% of fake bombs used to test their system. I think we can all agree for the money being spent that would equal a giant fail in anybody's book.

      So maybe we should do as Schneier suggests and better spend that money on intelligence gathering and boots on the ground? Because with stats like that the odds they will actually stop anybody who really wants to do harm is pretty damned slim.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    14. Re:Uh by Kosi · · Score: 1

      I'm fairly sure enough exposure to X-rays can make you sterile so I can see where they would have their uses for sex.

      I can see for some whales how this could be fun if you neglect the radiation damage. But we humans don't have a single bone in our boners, and as said before, there are better methods like vasectomy out there.

    15. Re:Uh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm with you, bro. X-ray anal sex is as hot as it gets!

      I'm sure the gamma-ray variety is more radioactive.

    16. Re:Uh by Alimony+Pakhdan · · Score: 1

      Sorry, no matter how attractive, I still wont let anyone near my cavities.

      Not even that cute dental assistant?

    17. Re:Uh by Tharsman · · Score: 1

      Are you crazy!? Have you seen the tools those guys carry?! Uh Uh, no way!!!

    18. Re:Uh by mjwx · · Score: 1

      If the TSA employed more attractive people they wouldn't have to send us away to hospitals for body cavity reports.

      Attractive plus controlling?

      So you're saying the TSA should hire dominatrix's?

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    19. Re:Uh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      lol, you still think these measures are about stopping guns, knives and bombs getting on planes? lol

    20. Re:Uh by Alimony+Pakhdan · · Score: 1

      Have you seen the tools those guys carry?

      Protip: if you dont want a guy's tool in your mouth (not that there is anything wrong with that) dont go to West Hollywood Fabulous Dentistry.

  2. I thought it was... by Itesh · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Innocent until proven guilty not prove that you are innocent?

    1. Re:I thought it was... by toastar · · Score: 3, Funny

      Innocent until proven guilty not prove that you are innocent?

      Not in Australia, The whole place is a prison for god's sake.

    2. Re:I thought it was... by oodaloop · · Score: 1

      That's the courts, not TSA.

      On a somewhat related note, I have a pet peeve. I have a CI (counter intelligence) polygraph as part of my clearance, and part of the questions focus on links to terrorism. I passed, so the federal government is sufficiently convinced that I am not a terrorist to give me access to sensitive information. So why does another branch of the federal government still check me for weapons when I get on a plane? Why can't I show my standard IC badge and go through security?

      --
      Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
    3. Re:I thought it was... by theghost · · Score: 2

      They can't even find guns with scanners and full-body gropers and you expect them to be able to know the difference between a real document and a forgery?

      --
      The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.
    4. Re:I thought it was... by morcego · · Score: 2

      Because the TSA people don't have enough clearance to verify yours is real ?
      Kinda funny, people with less clearance than you questioning you on that ....

      --
      morcego
    5. Re:I thought it was... by droopus · · Score: 1

      Isn't CI "Confidential Informant" to the feds?

      --
      "The pie shall be cut in half and each man shall receive.....death. I'll eat the pie."
    6. Re:I thought it was... by oodaloop · · Score: 1

      The badge has an RFID, and I can use it to badge into DIA, CIA, NSA, etc. TSA can't figure out how to install a standard RFID scanner?

      --
      Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
    7. Re:I thought it was... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about undue search and seizure? ...or is this "quartering of soldiers"?

    8. Re:I thought it was... by oodaloop · · Score: 1

      The guard at the desk at work doesn't have my clearance either, but he can see when my RFID badge activates the reader and lets me in or if it fails and beeps annoyingly. There are hundreds of thousands of cleared individuals like me, let alone how many off-duty and retired police officers, active duty and retired military, and other trusted individuals who should not be searched and probed every time they fly like it's the first the government has scrutinized them.

      --
      Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
    9. Re:I thought it was... by oodaloop · · Score: 1

      It's also Carbon Iodine, or Chlorine depending on the font, to chemists. Strong law of large numbers and all that. I'm sure it has many meanings.

      --
      Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
    10. Re:I thought it was... by skids · · Score: 1

      Well, doing so would create a situation where "loyal citizens" get preferential treatment versus anyone who has not been so assessed. Not that that is a good enough reason in and of itself, but I'm sure you can see the potential for dangerous precedent there.

      Seriously, though -- I'm conjecturing here but it would seem to me that such an ID card would only be used in low traffic environments, where there is time and attention to spare such that nobody would reasonably expect to be able to steal your badge and then make themselves up to look like you. Such is not true of an airport, with low-wage TSA workers and airline CSRs handling thousands of customers a day.

    11. Re:I thought it was... by Plekto · · Score: 1

      In fact, you'd probably WANT some of these people on the flights in case something actually happened. Making it so hard that they would rather drive there instead is not necessarily the brightest option.

      And, if they can put you on a no-fly list, they can certainly check for things like this. People like Senators, military officials, and so on and so on should simply be exempt. How about a "express/no body cavity search check list"(with proper RFID backed badge/etc, of course)

    12. Re:I thought it was... by oodaloop · · Score: 2

      The standard badge, in use in many intelligence agencies, has an RFID. I wave it in front of a door, and it opens. People wear them all over the place. That Clear company that lost the laptop (reported here a few times) tried to basically do the same thing: make a separate line for people who were cleared so TSA can process them faster. Good idea, but Clear obviously mishandled it. There are standards for various IDs. Why can't they implement one and save themselves time and money searching all those people? "Loyal" citizens or not, there are plenty of people who don't need to be treated like terrorists and should be able to carry knives or other non-firearm weapons. I'm a former Marine, have a concealed carry permit for handguns, and have been thoroughly investigated by the govt over the last 14 years. Why can't I carry a pocket knife on a plane? As another poster just pointed out, wouldn't you WANT more people like me on planes? Trusted, thoroughly vetted, armed, ready to serve?

      --
      Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
    13. Re:I thought it was... by baegucb · · Score: 1

      Wasn't the Fort Hood shooter an active military officer? Moot point for me, I stopped flying 10 years ago since I didn't enjoy it anymore.

    14. Re:I thought it was... by matrim99 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      To be honest, I *WANT* senators and elected officials to have to go through all of the security procedures that us regular folks have to endure.
      Eating their own dog food, and all that.

      --
      Right. No, your other right. No, the other other right.
    15. Re:I thought it was... by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 1

      Because you are talking about instituting a national ID and that never seems to go over very well with anybody.

      --
      "But this one goes to 11!"
    16. Re:I thought it was... by oodaloop · · Score: 1

      True, and the indicators that he was violent and had connections to terrorists should have been heeded. Perhaps an additional layer of security like a metal detector or full body scanner would keep him off a plane, perhaps not. The active duty military member or retired police officer that is a physical threat to others, let alone a bona fide al qaeda terrorist, is rather rare. Personally, I'm a big fan of letting everyone on board with knives, brass knuckles, expandable police batons and other melee weapons, while prohibiting guns and explosives. It's kinda hard to take over a plane with a knife when everyone else has one too. But that's just me.

      --
      Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
    17. Re:I thought it was... by camperdave · · Score: 1

      Flying is a lot nicer than it was 10 years ago. These days everyone gets a touch screen LCD monitor from which they can choose a variety of on demand in flight entertainment. Also, planes have power outlets at every seat so you can plug in your laptop if need be. The days of everyone watching the same in flight movie on a single screen is over.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    18. Re:I thought it was... by oodaloop · · Score: 1

      There's already a national ID for military with barcodes on the back and standard scanners everywhere. Most military bases have hand-held ones and scan your military ID card (CAC: Common Access Card) when you come on base. There is also a standard Intelligence Community badge with RFID. Not every citizen needs or warrants one of these, but those who have them should be able to use them.

      --
      Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
    19. Re:I thought it was... by Plekto · · Score: 1

      Well, yes, there's that angle to consider as well...

      Perhaps if they also get the same security clearances? Oh, wait - that might be a GREAT idea. I can just imagine what a top level security clearance background check on a typical official would bring up. If they can deal with that, they deserve to be given a break.

    20. Re:I thought it was... by sconeu · · Score: 2

      Feeding the troll...

      CI in this case is "Compartmentalized Information".

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    21. Re:I thought it was... by dougisfunny · · Score: 1

      Perhaps the flight might be nicer, but is getting onto the flight nicer?

      I imagine cars are nicer today than they were 10 years ago since they have those new gadgets as well, but it doesn't take a cavity search to buy/rent a car.

      --
      This is not the funny you're looking for.
    22. Re:I thought it was... by matrim99 · · Score: 1

      Heh, that would solve a *lot* of other issues. I like it. But then there wouldn't be many candidates left to vote for. At all.
      Hmm, that sounded like a problem when I first said it...

      --
      Right. No, your other right. No, the other other right.
    23. Re:I thought it was... by dougisfunny · · Score: 1

      Use them for what? Buying a beer? Proving you're over 18 at Wal-Mart? Checking your credit score or getting a loan from the bank?

      --
      This is not the funny you're looking for.
    24. Re:I thought it was... by CrispyZorro · · Score: 0

      Why can't I carry a pocket knife on a plane?

      Because your weapon works in other hands as well.

    25. Re:I thought it was... by flappinbooger · · Score: 2

      There is so much outcry that the TSA "security theater" is ineffective and many people realize it is just there to make you feel safe. The goons are mostly unskilled and mostly untrained (2 weeks training, you get to grope), and have less security clearance than you do - yet they can make your life miserable and cause you no end of grief if you don't play Janet's game by her rules.

      Recall the youtube video by a pilot who was outraged that flight crews had to go through the grope machine, yet any ground crew with a card can swipe into secure areas with no check and freely do whatever with the planes. What about that guy who just recently bribed a ticket agent to check a bag with someone elses name on it?

      All of the security policies are based on responses to supposed threats - someone had a bomb in their shoe, everyone take off the shoes. Someone had a bomb in their underwear - full body scan/grope. How about a preventative security policy, not a reactive security policy?

      So if they scanned your RFID card would it have a picture of you come up? Or could anyone who stole your card get your access?

      --
      Flappinbooger isn't my real name
    26. Re:I thought it was... by HeronBlademaster · · Score: 1

      I like the idea of issuing a baseball bat to every passenger at boarding time (to be returned at the destination gate) for that reason. Sure, a terrorist on board would have a bat, but he'll find it difficult to use when everyone else does too... That way there's no chance that most passengers simply won't have melee weapons with them.

    27. Re:I thought it was... by HeronBlademaster · · Score: 1

      You don't get those things if you're flying domestic... at least not that I've ever seen. They don't even feed you nowadays.

    28. Re:I thought it was... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Innocent until proven guilty not prove that you are innocent?

      Not since Reagan and the pre-employment drug screenings/paper checks.

    29. Re:I thought it was... by oodaloop · · Score: 1

      Is that a joke? Follow the thread. I should be able to use it to get on a plane. I proved to the federal government that I am not a terrorist and they gave me a standard badge that gets me into the CIA, NSA, and other places. I should be able to get on a plane without getting scanned or groped.

      --
      Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
    30. Re:I thought it was... by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      If it's like almost all the other RFID badges in the world, someone could easily clone it just by walking past you. They can even build the reader and transmitter into one handy self-contained cloning unit:

      http://hackaday.com/2011/02/07/simple-rfid-access-system-clone/

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    31. Re:I thought it was... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is oodaloop, posting from my phone and not logged in. The RFIDs are not like all the others. They are encrypted specifically to avoid being cloned.

    32. Re:I thought it was... by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 1

      Where do you live?

      --
      Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
    33. Re:I thought it was... by MoonBuggy · · Score: 1

      Depends on the airline. Last few transatlantic economy flights I did, Lufthansa didn't even have TVs in the seats, United had personal TVs but just set to a choice of six looping channels, and KLM had an actual on-demand system like you described.

      Even with the shiny toys, though, you get treated like cattle in the back of the plane, not to mention the obvious complaints about playing your part in that day's 'security theatre' production. Flying itself generally sucks unless you pay the extra to be treated like a human being by purchasing a business class ticket (in which case you're pretty much guaranteed to get decent tech to play with too), and getting through security sucks pretty much invariably (although it does tend to be better in small regional airports, I've found). Even if it's improved over the last ten years, I'd be hard pressed to recommend it, but unfortunately transatlantic surface crossings are still much more expensive than even business air tickets, and most people don't have the luxury of taking a week to reach their destination.

    34. Re:I thought it was... by MoonBuggy · · Score: 1

      I've said it many times, but I'll say it again: if they really cared about bladed weapons on planes, they wouldn't allow glass.

      Incidentally, does anyone know the logic behind having to pick up your duty free at the jet bridge rather than just carrying it out of the shop like you used to be able to do? You've already passed security, meaning you (theoretically) don't have anything too dangerous to allow on the plane, and the purchases themselves still go in the cabin, so I can't work out what the theory is behind preventing you from carrying them around the terminal.

    35. Re:I thought it was... by Plekto · · Score: 1

      In all seriousness, though, shouldn't all people be required to undergo this sort of back ground check before they are even able to be placed on any ballot or appointed to any position? And yes, I know about it - most people don't. I have a relative who had to get "God level" clearance as he put it and they asked his grade school teachers about him. No joke - they dug and dug and dug, then made some new holes and dug some more.

      Anyone who can pass all of that should be fairly safe to be elected and shouldn't have any surprises that make it into the press.

    36. Re:I thought it was... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are living proof that just because you have a security clearance doesn't mean that you're not an idiot.

    37. Re:I thought it was... by Anachragnome · · Score: 1, Informative

      "Not in Australia, The whole place is a prison for god's sake."

      I love it when Americans say something along those lines...Sure, it's a joke and I laughed too, but you also highlight the ignorance we Americans display in regards to the subject.

      From Wikipedia's article on "Penal Transportation":

      "North America was used for transportation from the early 17th century to the American Revolution of 1776. In the 17th century, it was done at the expense of the convicts or the shipowners. The first Transportation Act in 1718 allowed courts to sentence convicts to seven years' transportation to America. In 1720, extension authorized payments by the state to merchants contracted to take the convicts to America. Under the Transportation Act, returning from transportation was a capital offence.[2][3]

      The gaols became overcrowded and dilapidated ships were pressed into service, the hulks moored in various ports as floating gaols. The number of convicts transported to North America is not verified although it has been estimated to be 50,000 by Dr John Dunmore Lang. These went originally to New England, the majority of prisoners taken in battle from Ireland and Scotland. Some were sold as slaves to the Southern states.[4]

      From the 1620s until the American Revolution, the British colonies in North America received transported British criminals, effectively double the period that Australian colonies received convicts. The American Revolutionary War brought that to an end and, since the remaining British colonies in what is now Canada were close to the new United States of America, prisoners sent there might become hostile to British authorities. Thus, the British Government was forced to look elsewhere."

    38. Re:I thought it was... by Cwix · · Score: 1

      They are encrypted specifically to avoid being cloned.

      Hope the government didn't buy your encrypted rfid from the same companies that make full body scanners. Cause those don't work.

      Frankly how do you encrypt one way traffic?
      RFID says 011010
      Scammer hears 011010
      Scammer uses 011010
      Door opens. Im no security expert, but from what I understand all the rfid says is open sesame, with out some more sophisticated electronics in the badge, which would require a battery, how do you use "encrypted" communications with it.

      --
      You are entitled to your own opinions, not your own facts.
    39. Re:I thought it was... by jimmyswimmy · · Score: 1

      actually in his case it refers to CounterIntelligence as he wrote. This is one of two types of polygraphs used by the US for granting and retaining certain types of defense security clearances.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._security_clearance_terms

      --

      Just my $0.55 (US inflation, 1774-2008, for $0.02)
    40. Re:I thought it was... by captain_sweatpants · · Score: 1

      I am Australian. I cringed a little. The other thing about this issue is when the supply of cheap/free labour from the ex/convicts dried up, they were replaced with more slaves. Kind of hard to come back with a joke about slavery though.

    41. Re:I thought it was... by Nursie · · Score: 1

      Then you can only elect people who have never done *anything* the least bit risky in their lives.

      All this does is hand the government even more into the hands of military and police establishment. Some of the people I'd want in power would be precisely the people who would fail these things. Activists, people who stood up and were counted at protests for freedom from over-government.

      Sorry, but this is an absolutely terrible idea, unless you love the status quo and never, ever want it to change.

    42. Re:I thought it was... by Nursie · · Score: 1

      Stops you buying it for domestic passengers in the same terminal, IMHO.

      Not a security measure at all, but a tax/revenue measure.

    43. Re:I thought it was... by sconeu · · Score: 1

      Doh! For some reason I missed it in the OP's post, and was thinking of an SCI clearance.

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    44. Re:I thought it was... by Plekto · · Score: 1

      I didn't say that they had to GET the clearance. Merely undergo a similar level background check. Let the voters decide which one of them is the lesser of the two evils based upon everything that they have done.

      Most activists have no issue with the things that they have done, and usually see it as a point of pride(and the press almost always knows about it anyways). It's the supposedly squeaky clean type who actually has a dozen skeletons that they are hiding that is the real issue.

    45. Re:I thought it was... by tftp · · Score: 1

      Frankly how do you encrypt one way traffic?

      1. It's easy, just generate a random sequence and salt the plaintext with it before encrypting. The RNG would be easy to make because the card access is a manual process, with no scan being exactly like any other.
      2. Not all RFID cards are read-only. EM4095 allows you to transmit into the token, and the token is free to do whatever it wants with the data.
      3. There are many RFID readers on the market that are encrypted to some extent. See Indala.
      4. The tag may only need to present its ID, then a link to an external database delivers the rest - your photo, your fingerprints, your other IDs, etc.
    46. Re:I thought it was... by Nursie · · Score: 1

      I'd rather have the guy or gal that did drugs and slept around a bit, has ambivalent feelings about massive military spending and doesn't give a crap who marries who.

      But the problem is that the media and the population will get whipped up into a fervour, they'll have moral panic like never before. Instead of people pretending to be puritans, we'll get people elected to power who are actually puritan. And that's likely even worse!

      It's not a bad idea, that sort of clarity and transparency, and in a reasonable world it would be great because hypocrites and the corrupt would be outed and out of power. It's a shame we don't live in such a reasonable world really

    47. Re:I thought it was... by theghost · · Score: 1

      The badge has an RFID, and I can use it to badge into DIA, CIA, NSA, etc. TSA can't figure out how to install a standard RFID scanner?

      Honestly...no. These people are one rung above mall cops.

      --
      The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.
    48. Re:I thought it was... by Zemran · · Score: 1

      sorry, which century are you from?

      --
      I love stacking my barbecues in the shed at the end of summer - you can't beat a bit of grill on grill action.
    49. Re:I thought it was... by oodaloop · · Score: 1

      The low-level baggage handler/fondlers perhaps. TSA has figured out how to install expensive backscatter Xray devices that surreptitiously save images. I would place RFID scanners as less complex and less expensive devices to those.

      --
      Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
    50. Re:I thought it was... by Plekto · · Score: 1

      If the Media goes into too insane of a frenzy, people won't trust either them or the politicians. That's pretty much normal for the rest of the world. Somehow in the U.S., people seem to have an irrational desire to blindly trust those in power. While their default view should be one of not trusting those in power or being suspicious of them at the least as the default stance, they seem to have this cultural conditioning or psychological need (you could write a book on it easily I bet) to have someone to worship or put on a pedestal. A hero who fights for them and so on.

      I think maybe we've all been reading too many comics and watching too many TV shows, because the world is a place where those in power are usually corrupt.

    51. Re:I thought it was... by niftymitch · · Score: 1

      That's the courts, not TSA. ....snip...
          Why can't I show my standard IC badge and go through security?

      Because their clearance is not high enough to know if you have a clearance.

      --
      Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't. Mark Twain.
    52. Re:I thought it was... by Tacvek · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure he is really talking about contactless smartcard technology, rather than RFID. They look similar, but work very differently. They are powered by inductive coupling, and run a specialized microprocessor, rather than being passive devices like RFID.

      --
      Stylish sheet to fix many problems in Slashdot's D3: https://gist.github.com/801524
    53. Re:I thought it was... by dougisfunny · · Score: 1

      More satire, I was going for the whole 'slippery slope' thing, I guess I just skipped too many steps:
      I can use it for A why can't I use it for B?
      I can use it for B why can't I use it for C?
      I can use it for C why can't I use it for D?
      You get the TSA using it, then what? Customs? And so on, to the point that it become a generic ID required for everything. Similar to the social security number.

      --
      This is not the funny you're looking for.
  3. Politicians are full of shit. by Microlith · · Score: 4, Insightful

    From the article: "Home Affairs Minister Brendan O'Connor said the scanners would also help innocent travelers. 'The option of an internal body scan will more quickly exonerate the innocent and ensure a minimum of delay for legitimate travelers,' Mr O'Connor said."

    Why should they need to be exonerated? Why should they have to suffer through a high intensity blast of x-ray just to prove that they aren't terrorists?

    Why aren't the terrorists exploiting this hole RIGHT NOW and KILLING MILLIONS and INFLICTING TERROR?

    Maybe it's because the threat is overblown and someone is sucking your cock in exchange for your pushing these useless, unneeded machines. Or maybe you're like Chertoff, destined to profit handsomely by pushing your employer (and other governments) to buy equipment from a company you own.

    1. Re:Politicians are full of shit. by Ancantus · · Score: 2

      Why aren't the terrorists exploiting this hole RIGHT NOW and KILLING MILLIONS and INFLICTING TERROR?

      They don't need to when the TSA can do it for them.

      --
      Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent. -- Isaac Asimov
    2. Re:Politicians are full of shit. by phantomcircuit · · Score: 2

      Why aren't the terrorists exploiting this hole RIGHT NOW and KILLING MILLIONS and INFLICTING TERROR?

      Putting things up your butt is against islam, duh

    3. Re:Politicians are full of shit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, politicians are full of shit, and these devices will confirm it on a daily basis.

    4. Re:Politicians are full of shit. by morcego · · Score: 2

      Hummm, the terrorist ARE inflicting terror. They are just using the government as the tool for it. They don't need to move a finger, except to drop a few well placed news and rumors.

      --
      morcego
    5. Re:Politicians are full of shit. by ringm000 · · Score: 2

      The terrorists aren't using the government, the government is using the terrorists.

    6. Re:Politicians are full of shit. by Inzite · · Score: 2

      The terrorists aren't using the government, the government is using the terrorists.

      Seems like a mutually beneficial relationship to me.

      To draw a parallel with another resilient industry, who's actually using whom? Is the sex-obsessed client exploiting the vulnerable, defenseless prostitute? Or is it really the prostitute who's exploiting the client?

      Either way, it's a comfy scenario for the military-industrial pimp.

    7. Re:Politicians are full of shit. by dpilot · · Score: 1

      Gadzooks, I wish I had mod points today.

      --
      The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
    8. Re:Politicians are full of shit. by Thud457 · · Score: 1

      "The TSA, we violate your dignity so Usama doesn't have to!"

      --

      the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

    9. Re:Politicians are full of shit. by interkin3tic · · Score: 1

      I heard from a guy that Al quaeda has infiltrated parliament and put secret brain bugs in their brains to control them. A skull cavity examination will exonerate the legitimate politicians. Just let a doctor perform exploratory surgery on your brain, and you'll be allowed to continue politicking.

    10. Re:Politicians are full of shit. by Patch86 · · Score: 1

      Politicians are full of shit.

      As, coincidentally, is your main cavity.

    11. Re:Politicians are full of shit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not true, many in Middle East would rather have sex with men rather than women because women are considered "dirty" according to islam.
      http://www.glas.org/ahbab/Articles/arabia1.html

    12. Re:Politicians are full of shit. by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Putting _thing_ up someones butt vs. putting things up _your_ butt.

      The prison definition of gay is also the arab one.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    13. Re:Politicians are full of shit. by Ohrion · · Score: 1

      +5 Insightful

    14. Re:Politicians are full of shit. by Jason+Levine · · Score: 1

      I've been saying this for awhile. Instead of having to plan and execute an attack Al Qaeda now basically has to say "We plan on blowing up planes via this method." Then they can sit back and watch the US government freak out and intrude on passengers' rights more just to "protect" against this. I'm waiting for the inevitable day when we'll have to hand over our clothes to the TSA agents and fly nude... you know, to protect passengers... in case someone's hidden a bomb somewhere. Of course, given how some people look, maybe they'll enforce it "randomly." "You there. Lady in the short skirt and large... um potential bomb hiding locations... you've been randomly selected to fly nude. Resist and you'll prove you're a terrorist."

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    15. Re:Politicians are full of shit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh... That was the joke...smart guy...

    16. Re:Politicians are full of shit. by Requiem18th · · Score: 1

      Ok let me try to make the TSA ban everything under the sky until it breaks down:
      I heard a terrorist say they are going to hide lock-picking equipment in white people teeth during dental cleanings.
      They found a way to build a sufficiently harmful plastic gun and hiding it within the frame of luggage and laptops.
      They found a way to make a bomb out of a cellphone battery, including tables.
      They found a way to use shoe laces to take a hostage long enough for a them of terrorist to draw out more complicated plans, including new ways to hide explosives, like getting C4 inside stuffed chocolates and M&Ms. ...

      Why? Because apparently the public won't react until you have to strip naked and remain handcuffed to your seat for the duration of the flight.

      --
      But... the future refused to change.
    17. Re:Politicians are full of shit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know the economy is really fucked when even the Al Qaeda is outsourcing.

  4. I feel safer already by Ancantus · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Has there been an incident where a terrorist has hidden a bomb in his small intestine? Is it really a viable business strategy to hide drugs within your body in order to get them crossed the border. I cannot believe that there is enough free space in a persons body to hide a profitable amount of drugs.

    --
    Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent. -- Isaac Asimov
    1. Re:I feel safer already by Nadaka · · Score: 1

      No to the first, yes to the second if you don't care about the mule dieing from a ruptured drug condom in the stomach or prolapse from the use of larger, well wrapped packages in other orifices.

    2. Re:I feel safer already by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is only a matter of time before some suicidal bastard has a few unnecessary organs surgically removed and replaced with C4 and boards a plane. Boom.

    3. Re:I feel safer already by GungaDan · · Score: 1

      There has been at least one attempt at a rectum (business end of the large intestine) bomb. Small intestine would be tough to get to since you'd need to pass through 6' or more of large bowel to get to it from the back end, or the mouth, throat and stomach from the front end.

      --
      Eloi are stupid, throw morlocks at them!
    4. Re:I feel safer already by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      Yes, a terrorist tried to blow up a Saudi prince with explosives hidden in his ass. I remember someone on Slashdot linked to the report with graphic pics of the aftermath. The dumb fucker (the terrorist, not the prince who decided to meet with a "reformed terrorist" in person) was peeled apart like Elmer Fudd's shotgun after Bugs stuck his finger in it.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    5. Re:I feel safer already by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It nearly killed 'im!!!!

      Wait, no, I suppose it did kill him.

    6. Re:I feel safer already by avandesande · · Score: 2

      The important thing though is that the man's body absorbed the shock-wave and the explosion caused little or no damage to those around him, so it appears to not even be a viable technique.

      --
      love is just extroverted narcissism
    7. Re:I feel safer already by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      That's right, nobody else was really hurt.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    8. Re:I feel safer already by misexistentialist · · Score: 1

      A human can eat several pounds, and drug prohibition has made leaf and flower extracts quite precious, so a mule's load can be worth around $200,000. Most of that is profit, so it is indeed a great business. Bombs would probably be surgically implanted rather than swallowed, but Al-Qaeda has already been so successful that it's not really worth it when western countries are already spending all of their resources on imaginary attacks.

    9. Re:I feel safer already by Darinbob · · Score: 2

      Well I'm sure that the bystanders who viewed the explosion probably neede a reasonable amount of therapy time afterwords.

    10. Re:I feel safer already by Zancarius · · Score: 1

      I can't find the original link I had posted (although I doubt it's the one you're referring to), but here's one that contains a picture of the bomber that looks vaguely like one of the ones I came across:

      Al Qaeda Bombers Learn from Drug Smugglers.

      Hope that helps.

      To answer Nadaka a ways up the reply chain: Yes, there has been an incident where someone has attempted to blow up a sensitive target by stuffing themselves with explosives.

      --
      He who has no .plan has small finger. ~ Confucius on UNIX
    11. Re:I feel safer already by mywhitewolf · · Score: 1

      no more so than if your naked image gets released on the internet.

    12. Re:I feel safer already by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Legalize drugs = problem solved. No need to smuggle what you can legally import!

    13. Re:I feel safer already by Requiem18th · · Score: 1

      Gives a new meaning to butt-hurt.

      --
      But... the future refused to change.
  5. No Way by headhot · · Score: 5, Informative

    I'd rather have a Dr or Nurse oversee my doses of radiation then an undertrained cop school dropout.

    1. Re:No Way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Totally agree with you. I read an article the other day saying these devices are NOT FDA approved because they aren't medical devices and technically should not be being shot at any living thing legally, yet the TSA slips into this hole every day. The article I'd read said most of the devices are not made well and aren't configured correctly and says they put off like 3x the allowed amount of radiation for a medical device. They're already trying to give us skin cancer, next it'll be colon cancer :P

    2. Re:No Way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm starting to wonder if certain Corporate entities, and by proxy, the Gov. , want to increase the cancer rate before their upcoming release of a universal cancer drug. This seems like a sure fire way to explode a drugs inception into a market while making making a killing financially.

      Is it really paranoia if it's completely 100% possible?

    3. Re:No Way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And even then, there are problems...http://www.drflounder.com/archives/533

  6. force companies to be non-profits that sell to tsa by Dan667 · · Score: 2

    i bet these stupid invasive technologies would magically stopped being pushed if the executive salaries at these companies were capped at 10x the lowest paid employee and they had to be non-profits.

  7. freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    > He said the new X-rays would be used only if suspects agreed to undergo scans.

    How long will that last for?

    In the UK, airport body scanners were "optional" when introduced - it was obscene how quickly they became mandatory. The word "big fat lie" came to mind.

    More to the point, why are drugs banned? if I want to take drugs and someone wants to sell them to me, what's wrong with that?

    Why do we have a whole bunch of people taking money from us without our consent, deciding what we should or should not do, and then enforcing those rules upon us?

    1. Re:freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      because the corporation of the United States is bankrupt and the whole system is a sham trying to extract money from anyone (your person) anyway it can to pay back it's debts. why do you think a criminal allegation is called a charge? and logically how does paying money make an alleged bad deed ok? Under colour of law they will take more and more freedoms to protect you if the people will keep putting up with it. The most loyal slave is one that thinks he is free. I assume this will be modded down because the truth is sometimes to painful to bare.

    2. Re:freedom by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      Why do we have a whole bunch of people taking money from us without our consent, deciding what we should or should not do, and then enforcing those rules upon us?

      They don't. You're free to move to another country and denounce your original citizenship. There are legitimate reasons to oppose government policies. That is not one of them.

      Or did you mean "Why do I have to pay for a package of government services, as opposed to only the ones that I like?"

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    3. Re:freedom by chicago_scott · · Score: 1

      Renouncing your US citizenship isn't as straightforward or as easy has you make it sound. You usually must first become a citizen of another country before the US will allow you to renounce your citizenship and that can take years or decades. During that time, assuming you find a country that will let you stay while you await citizenship, you're obligated to pay taxes to the US and you new home country. No country likes to give up give up a source of revenue.

      Electing to leave: A reader's guide to expatriating on November 3
      http://www.harpers.org/archive/2004/10/0080240

    4. Re:freedom by interkin3tic · · Score: 1

      More to the point, why are drugs banned?

      Sure, but I think it's in our interests to keep the two issues separate. It's already too easy for the enemies of privacy to spout nonsense like "If you're opposed to this, you're supporting DRUG DEALER TERRORISTS PEDOPHILES!!!!!" I think we'd be wise to focus on how this is yet another invasion of privacy, and not allow the issue to be tied to drug legalization.

    5. Re:freedom by DarkTempes · · Score: 1

      You bring up an interesting idea though. I could definitely see an a-la-carte tax system working in a modern democracy (it'd still be a democratic republic as you'd still have congress making the options).

      It wouldn't have worked in the old days because of the pure logistics of it...but I imagine a menu of items you could pay taxes for/indicate where you prefer your taxes to go to could work.

      There are problems of course that would have to be worked out but that's true of any system.

      You might need a society with a minimum level of education, though. They have to be smart enough not to say, "Well, the roads work now so why should I pay taxes to keep them up when I can push my tax dollars to $petpublicproject".

    6. Re:freedom by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 1

      Why do we have a whole bunch of people taking money from us without our consent, deciding what we should or should not do, and then enforcing those rules upon us?

      They don't. You're free to move to another country and denounce your original citizenship.

      It's "renounce".

      And (as of the last time I looked) it doesn't get you out of US income and death taxes for 10 years (unless you're completely up-to-date on income taxes for the previous five years and have both a low-to-moderate income and little accumulated property). And then you can't be in the US for more than 30 days a year (or 60 if working for a completely out-of-country company) without ending up back on the tax rolls again.

      Ask John Walker, ex of Autodesk, about it. B-b

      --
      Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
    7. Re:freedom by AmonTheMetalhead · · Score: 1

      Mandatory in the UK? Guess i won't be flying there then.

    8. Re:freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shut the fuck up, drugfag.

    9. Re:freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only from London and Manchester airports (so, 4 in total). The rest of the country isnt using them.

    10. Re:freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More to the point, why are drugs banned? if I want to take drugs and someone wants to sell them to me, what's wrong with that?

      Why do we have a whole bunch of people taking money from us without our consent, deciding what we should or should not do, and then enforcing those rules upon us?

      Wow, seriously? Have you ever met a drug addict before? Hard drugs like the ones smuggled around (like heroin, cocaine, speed, etc) are the bane of society. Forget about self righteous arseholes, greedy executives, hard drugs are the biggest problem in society. Drugs kill, people kill for drugs. People prostitute themselves out for a hit, they will (often rather violently) rob stores and people for the chance of scoring some drugs. Most habitual drug users are mentally messed up. Paranoia, psychosis, and schizophrenia are just a few of the more problematic mental issues which result from drug use. Remember Ozzie Osbourne? His lack of smarts is the direct result of massive drug use.

      There is a reason why they send people (usually police) to schools to teach people about the dangers of drugs*.

      * Marijuana is a bit of a oddball here, excessive use will mess you up (lung cancer, causing psychosis in those who are susceptible, paranoia etc) but used casually will not cause much more issues then any other legal substance.

  8. Think of the criminals! by MrOctogon · · Score: 2

    From TFA: "Mr O'Connor said people carrying drugs inside their bodies could die if bags split or leak, so it was important to check as soon as possible." So my rights are being violated because some felon might kill themselves with their stupidity? Makes sense. I'll bend over now.

    1. Re:Think of the criminals! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How are your rights being violated? There's such a positive right as the right to take cheap flights? Nothing is stopping you from taking a private charter, except monetary constraints. You have a "right" to publish political tracts, but if all printers are charging and you cannot afford it, it seems a dubious claim to make, that your rights are being violated.

  9. Just Like Futurama by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 4, Funny

    Now strip naked and get on the probulator.

    1. Re:Just Like Futurama by AmonTheMetalhead · · Score: 1

      I'd rather have the probulator then TSA goons, at least that thing doesn't nuke you every time you have to fly, you only get raped by it once.

  10. New Technology: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Reading your mind knowing your going to commit a crime before it happens.

  11. wonderful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Complete with body cavity pat down?

  12. Only a matter of time before the TSA jumps on this by citking · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I bet Ms. Janet Napolitano is wet just hearing about this*.

    I'm disappointed that this article is not from the Onion. Can no one realize that 9/11 was just a fluke and the likelihood of it happening again that way is astronomical (I know this is in Australia but I can almost guarantee that all heightened security is a direct result of 9/11, the British train bomb, and other random events)? Let's get rid of the security theater we have in place now and just live because life is pretty much bad enough as it is without having to invent reasons to make it even more miserable.

    I'd rather die on a hijacked plane than have to undergo full body cavity searches - at least my wife will be richer that way.

    *No need to thank me for that visual.

    --
    "This food is problematic."
  13. Health care crisis and terrorism in one fell grope by smoothnorman · · Score: 4, Funny

    "...annoyed TSA agents won't have to send you to a hospital for a body cavity scan", that's the ticket! conflate national health together with airport security. Prostate checks and weapons checks go hand in glove (and upwards where the sun don't shine). Health, safety, and a full pelvic exam, all at one stop. "uhm, no box cutter up here, but you might want to have this polyp removed at gate N17"

  14. The Australian Onion? by Rob+the+Bold · · Score: 1

    "The option of an internal body scan will more quickly exonerate the innocent and ensure a minimum of delay for legitimate travellers," Mr O'Connor said.

    news.com.au is the Australian counterpart of The Onion, I hope. Right?

    --
    I am not a crackpot.
    1. Re:The Australian Onion? by morcego · · Score: 1

      Probably the Australian counterpart of Fox News, if they are buying this "optional" bullshit.

      --
      morcego
    2. Re:The Australian Onion? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      News Limited own news.com.au, and are in turn owned by News Corp, hooray for Rupert Murdoch.

    3. Re:The Australian Onion? by KingKaneOfNod · · Score: 1

      You are correct. They are owned by News Corp. which as far as I know owns Fox News.

  15. Not anymore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Police checkpoints, wire tapping, spying on civilians from multiple directions, "emergency" powers designed to circumvent the concept (which of course are never repealed)... the guarantee of innocent until proven guilty has been eliminated in all but lip service. It's really no surprise; every government must do this at some point or their business stops expanding (in both power and revenue).

    The cold hard truth is that big government NEEDS a society full of "criminals", and if nature doesn't supply it, they will fabricate it through the coercive power of government.

    1. Re:Not anymore by icebike · · Score: 1

      Take a lesson from Egypt.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    2. Re:Not anymore by Nadaka · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Not applicable. We have the illusion of choice and democracy in America to placate the masses. But we really only get to choose between fascist authoritarian kleptocrat douche bag pandering to divisive inflammatory topic A and fascist authoritarian kleptocrat turd sandwich pandering to divisive and inflammatory topic B.

    3. Re:Not anymore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well said.

    4. Re:Not anymore by morcego · · Score: 2

      Bread and circus ....
      And, on a Orwellian mentality, we could also add: external enemy.

      That is all the government needs and, from what you can see, they are playing it by the book.

      --
      morcego
    5. Re:Not anymore by linuxwolf69 · · Score: 1

      Someone once said... if you quote south park in a political discussion, your argument is invalid.

      I for one agree though, the 2 party system is broken.

    6. Re:Not anymore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I get so tired of hearing the "America is bad" crap. America is still and always will be the freest country on Earth.

    7. Re:Not anymore by sheemwaza · · Score: 1

      Depends on your definition of free. If you define free as "not in jail and free to walk around outside," the US ranks dead last in the world. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_incarceration_rate Although, that's only one way of defining free.

    8. Re:Not anymore by dougisfunny · · Score: 1

      Until it's not?

      --
      This is not the funny you're looking for.
    9. Re:Not anymore by jmikelittle · · Score: 2

      Either you've never been to America, or you've never left it, I don't know which

    10. Re:Not anymore by michelcolman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Exactly. Most European countries provide a lot more freedom than the US. If we read here what some people are sued or arrested for in the States, we can't believe what we're hearing. Mothers arrested for breastfeeding their child (oh my God, think of the children!), laws against gays, agaist abortion, against euthanasia, against medical use of soft drugs, etc, etc, etc... Some states seem to apply a Christian version of the Sharia! No, the US may be a reasonably free country, but definitely not the freest on Earth. Not by a long shot.

    11. Re:Not anymore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No it isn't, and by saying that you sound like some uncultured rube who hasn't even set foot in any other countries.

    12. Re:Not anymore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In all fairness, having a high incarceration rate is probably at least a bit more ethical than just killing your criminals, as is the habit of some other countries.

    13. Re:Not anymore by PhilipTheHermit · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The US is no more homogeneous than Europe is. Just as you have fairly varied laws between, say, France and Turkey (which is part of Europe if not the EU), we have fairly varied laws as well.

      It is unfair of you to cherry-pick the things that happen in our "crazy" states and pretend that they're representative of the United States.

      Think of it this way.

      The United States is like a family with fifty members.

      You've got the bookish preppies (New England, New York, some states in the Northern Midwest, and the Pacific Northwest), their country cousins, (much of the Midwest and the SouthEast), and Uncle Hippy (California)... They're generally OK, you can have a normal conversation with them, and nothing weird will happen.

      Then you've got the weird cousins everyone else tries to avoid (the dumber of the "Red" states, of which Texas is probably the worst). They pick on strangers, they get drunk and punch out environmentalists, and in general, embarrass the whole family.

      You Europeans are like people living across the street, gossiping about us because we threw a barbecue and the whole weird family showed up. Forgotten are all the good things the family does, our literary works, our scientific discoveries, the two or three times we've called the police and stopped your house from getting burgled, and the fact that we're generally good neighbors. All you want to harp on is that Cousin Joe from Texas got drunk, stripped naked, climbed a telephone pole, and peed on a police officer. You think we're all terrible because of Cousin Joe. It lets you feel all SUPERIOR.

       

      --
      Thus spake the master programmer:
      "When the program is being tested, it is too late to make design changes." (Tao)
    14. Re:Not anymore by mistiry · · Score: 1

      Someone mod this excellent post UP!

    15. Re:Not anymore by Skidborg · · Score: 1

      I dunno, I'm starting to like Canada here more and more.

      --
      Supporter of the +1 Over Dramatic mod option. In memory of apk.
    16. Re:Not anymore by MasaMuneCyrus · · Score: 1

      I see this over and over and over again.

      The USA is not a third-world country. It is not authoritarian. Stop being so sensationalist.

      The US still ranks highly on all freedom lists. It is most certainly not the top, but it is most certainly within the ranks of highly advanced nations. Its corruption is low, its economic freedom is high. Once again, not #1, but not number #100, either.

      Yes, there are politicians with hidden agendas and secret contacts. But the fact that we can talk about it, let alone have opposition opponents running against said corrupt politicians is better than most of the world.

      Yes, there are corrupt police all over many cities, but the large cities of the United States != the United States. Local elections are significantly less corrupt all over the country, a corrupt police office in Chicago does not mean a corrupt police office in Carbondale, IL, and the citizens of the United States have remarkable say in how their state and local districts are run.

      Additionally, unlike Egypt, most of us live remarkably luxurious lives, and the standard of living in the US, even for poor people, is very high. Of course, feelings are relative and a poor person in the US might think they're in hell -- they're not, and it would be good for them to put themselves in the shoes of people in other countries and see what real tyranny is.

      The US has a lot of work to do -- a LOT. And it would be nice if the population would get a little bit more up-in-arms against the insanity of the federal government. However, it is not even close to revolution time. It is not even close to time to overthrow the government. It is time to reform.

    17. Re:Not anymore by mywhitewolf · · Score: 1
      but America kills its criminals too? you have the death penalty. in fact, most European countries don't support or use the death penalty.

      Belarus China Ecuador Egypt India Iran Iraq Israel Japan Malaysia Mongolia North Korea Pakistan Russia Saudi Arabia Singapore South Korea Taiwan Tonga United States

      from wikipedia. Still doesn't defend your high incarceration rate. if "suppressive china" has less prisoners, more people and supports the death penalty, then whats americas excuse?

    18. Re:Not anymore by mywhitewolf · · Score: 1

      no, perhaps you should read what the U part stands for in USA.

      considering your freedoms are mostly controlled by the federal government & constitution your point is invalid in regards to freedom.

    19. Re:Not anymore by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Whoever that person was never listen to them again.

      She/He is a moron and more then likely a Barbra Streisand fan.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    20. Re:Not anymore by gnapster · · Score: 1

      no, perhaps you should read what the U part stands for in USA.

      Don't you know what the U stands for in EU?

    21. Re:Not anymore by Alimony+Pakhdan · · Score: 1

      This post here? That shows you what happens when you make marijuana available over the counter.

    22. Re:Not anymore by PhilipTheHermit · · Score: 2

      EXACTLY what I was trying to say!

      I just thought of something else as well.

      Europeans' belief that they are superior is actually RECURSIVE!

      They start out by pretending all of Europe is like France.

      Then they pretend all of France is like Paris.

      Then they pretend all of Paris is like a fancy neighborhood IN Paris.

      Then they pretend that whole neighborhood is like that street they shot that movie on that time. In black and white with background music, no less.

      They don't seem to have an exit condition though. They just keep calling "allOfEuropeIsLike(String trendierPlace)". I suppose eventually they'll run out of CPU and get stuck with their mouth open, latte halfway to their lips, galoise hanging jauntily off their tongue, turtleneck catching fire from the ashes...

       

      --
      Thus spake the master programmer:
      "When the program is being tested, it is too late to make design changes." (Tao)
    23. Re:Not anymore by PhilipTheHermit · · Score: 1

      Thanks! You ever notice, the U.S. is about the size of Europe, and the individual states are about the size of European countries (except Alaska, which is the size of the continent of Australia), but nobody over there ever realizes the similarity?

      They think of Europe as a constellation of totally different places, and the U.S. as a single completely uniform place. This makes me think Europeans are completely illogical, like Glenn Beck listeners who think calling French Fries "Freedom Fries" is a good idea.

      The funniest thing of all is that they say "Ahhh, all you Americans think you split the atom, but who did this? Europeans who moved to America." But this description -- "Europeans who moved to America" -- covers virtually EVERYONE IN AMERICA except Native Americans!

      Realistically, America is nothing but Europe, Mark 2. You know, the improved model.

      --
      Thus spake the master programmer:
      "When the program is being tested, it is too late to make design changes." (Tao)
    24. Re:Not anymore by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      It's quite a bit worse than that there here in the Fascist States of America. Not only are all your points correct, but you didn't say enough about people being sued. Unlike more enlightened countries, there is no "loser pays" rule for lawsuits here, so barratry is quite common: using the legal system as a weapon, as those with more money get more justice. There is something called "SLAPP" to try to curtail that, but it's rarely used. As the MAFIAA cases have shown, there's very little protecting people from shakedowns by large companies who have made a business out of suing people and pressuring them into settling.

      Soft drugs are another big problem: it's bad enough that the USA criminalizes the use of marijuana, a relatively harmless drug (esp. compared to alcohol), but the USA is responsible for it being criminally illegal in much of the world, through its bullying over many decades.

      We aren't the least-free first-world nation, however. At least here in the USA, if some murderous criminals break into your home (a fairly common occurrence here in Phoenix), you're allowed to shoot them (in most states) without repercussions. In England, that'll land you in jail for murder, because criminals' rights are more important there than victims' rights.

    25. Re:Not anymore by PhilipTheHermit · · Score: 1

      Not so fast. As usual for guys like you, you don't know as much about the U.S. as you think you do.

      The Federal government only makes and enforces FEDERAL laws, and those mostly apply to interstate commerce.

      The laws that are applied to individuals, in their neighborhoods, are state and local laws. These vary incredibly widely from state to state, as do political attitudes, and the general demeanor of the people you'll meet if you walk around and talk to them.

      HERE IS A VERY SIMPLE EXAMPLE.

      Everyone has heard about the "war on drugs" correct? Well, the Federal Government strongly encourages states to make Marijuana illegal. It's listed on some schedule under which the Feds have declared it a terrible thing. If YOU were right, all states would have terrible laws against marijuana use and possession, and they would all be about the same.

      BUT! In Arizona, you get caught smoking pot and you're going to jail for 1/2 to 1 1/2 years, and can be forced to pay a $750 - $150,000 fine.

      In Texas, and this surprised me, if you have no prior convictions the judge can just let you go. If he doesn't, he MUST sentence you to probation and a treatment program. That is amazingly progressive for Texas, which I usually like to make fun of.

      Here in New York, getting caught with a joint will get you nothing more than a $100 ticket ($200 for the second offense, if you keep doing it eventually they'll put you in the county jail for a couple of days for being a pain in the ass).

      In Michigan, getting caught with pot will get you up to 90 days and a $100 fine. If you don't annoy the judge, it might be only a day or two, or probation. I've heard of people getting a $5 fine and a moderately stern lecture.

      So, YOUR point is invalid in regards to freedom. Our freedom is primarily regulated by STATE LAWS (and local judges), not Federal ones.

      Sort of like Europe! You'd rather be governed by France's laws than Turkey's, right?

      Same thing.

      --
      Thus spake the master programmer:
      "When the program is being tested, it is too late to make design changes." (Tao)
    26. Re:Not anymore by lpq · · Score: 1

      It's not that they NEED criminals, but it's the only way they can strip you of your rights and get total control over you. Thus you create a legal system where ANYONE can be criminalized. Those that step too far out of line find themselves shackled with GPS devices and almost any other 'right' arbitrarily removed.

      In a similar way (as was discussed in another thread where paypal shut down funding for pacifists), the government gives monopolies in certain areas to companies in exchange for the company doing the government's
      dirty work. Government can't censor movies? Allow a movie cartel to obtain monopoly status (owning studies, theaters, etc), and the cartel does the censoring. Even when the cartel's grip was forced open a bit, they still became the MPAA that sets the movie ratings. Those ratings control not just theaters, but everyplace that sells or rents DVD's -- as many places will refuse to carry unrated material or material higher than their policy allows.

      A horribly blatant abuse has been with the telephone monopoly (and telecommunications industry in general), but Ma Bell was given monopoly status for ongoing government cooperation, and even after it was
      broken up, it was allowed to reform under 'Bush-II', who needed a new
      communication 'figurehead-company' that it could use to setup illegal filtering operations for the CIA/FBI for all internet traffic going through the US near the start of Bush's first term. When it came out **congress** rushed through a retroactive protection package for all the telecoms that illegal cooperated with Bush under the auspices of 'war', but who's cooperation has, even from the start, been used to prosecute and investigate domestic crime more than foreign terrorism.

      Of course the Supreme Court Justices appointed by the Reagan-Bush 'era of government corruption' overturned or weakened the concept of illegally seized evidence being inadmissible in a court, to ALLOWING it if it was obtained 'accidently' through an officers normal pursuit of their duties...

      Amazing how many accidents happen when you are using computers to look for keywords and develop 'interpretive' abilities to look for any criminal activity through everyone's telecommunications...

      All supporting the goal of giving the government the ability to criminalize anyone should they want or need to...

    27. Re:Not anymore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's really insightful - thank you for an interesting and thought-provoking idea to consider.

      Police checkpoints, wire tapping, spying on civilians from multiple directions, "emergency" powers designed to circumvent the concept (which of course are never repealed)... the guarantee of innocent until proven guilty has been eliminated in all but lip service. It's really no surprise; every government must do this at some point or their business stops expanding (in both power and revenue).

      The cold hard truth is that big government NEEDS a society full of "criminals", and if nature doesn't supply it, they will fabricate it through the coercive power of government.

    28. Re:Not anymore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      against abortion

      OK, if you have laws against murder, and it's not a result of another crime (incest, rape, etc), then there's a very sound argument against abortion. I'm not arguing in favor or against, but just realize that's not a "Christian ideal".

    29. Re:Not anymore by mldi · · Score: 1

      That's how it was supposed to work, but it doesn't apply as much any more and applies less and less each day. The Fed are constantly trying to come in and set laws that all the States have to abide by. Either that, or they are stripping their power to make their own laws.

      --
      If you aren't suspicious of your government's actions, you aren't doing your job as a responsible citizen.
    30. Re:Not anymore by PhilipTheHermit · · Score: 1

      Well, so far the feds haven't really gotten anywhere. I'm optimistic. :)

      --
      Thus spake the master programmer:
      "When the program is being tested, it is too late to make design changes." (Tao)
  16. Figures by Drakkenmensch · · Score: 1

    Trust the government to find a multi-million dollar replacement option for the 35 cents latex glove.

  17. I can't wait to hear it by Dunbal · · Score: 2

    And soon when America imports these machines, the DHS will release a statement claiming that ionizing radiation is "completely harmless". The fun part is that the security officer in the picture is not using any sort of protective gear, so when she's dying of leukemia like so many radiologists have done, she can take comfort in that statement. Not only that, but it raises the following ethical questions: 1) Since when have security personnel been allowed to perform invasive medical procedures and 2) What happens when an obvious medical condition is clearly visible on one of these scans and ignored by unqualified security staff, resulting in a needless and preventable death - if only qualified personnel had seen it? But hey, the Nintendo generation will do whatever you tell them. No one cares anymore.

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    1. Re:I can't wait to hear it by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      But hey, the Nintendo generation will do whatever you tell them. No one cares anymore.

      You better not be a Gen. X'er if you're gonna start that shit. I can dig up dirt on Baby Boomers too if you wanna play Generational Warfare.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    2. Re:I can't wait to hear it by __aaxtnf2500 · · Score: 1

      Radiologists experienced dangerous occupational exposures prior to 1950. Exposure control and monitoring operations are significantly more advanced and it is not unsafe to be a radiologist. Thanks for the FUD though.
      http://radiology.rsna.org/content/233/2/313.full

    3. Re:I can't wait to hear it by howhi · · Score: 1

      the ethical question isn't 1) Since when have security personnel been allowed to perform invasive medical procedures - it should be 1) since when have security personnel been QUALIFIED to perform medical procedures. there is a reason why a doctor at a hospital analyses the X-ray images - they are trained for it. how is unqualified security staff supposed to recognize the obvious medical conditions? or any for that matter. analyzing the X-ray images is not a straight forward thing, especially when a person already has an underlying pathology. and also this: "...There would also be exemptions for pregnant women, people with mental impairments and those under 18". great, will they administer pregnancy tests as well? sexually active women may be in early stages of pregnancy and not know it yet. and that is the worst time for a unnecessary X-ray.

    4. Re:I can't wait to hear it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mod parent up. That was completely unnecessary.

    5. Re:I can't wait to hear it by Dunbal · · Score: 1

      Because they wear protection. I should know, what with being a physician and all... Back to my post: "the security officer in the picture is not using any sort of protective gear" Thanks for playing.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    6. Re:I can't wait to hear it by __aaxtnf2500 · · Score: 1

      The behavior of the radiation field is dependent on energy and the source configuration, and a backscatter x-ray machine is not going to behave like a medical source.
      Exposure off-axis is highly dependent on flux scattering.
      I managed exposure control and monitoring operations at a nuclear power plant and, having taken thousands of radiation surveys in a variety of environments, ionizing radiation field types, and during high-radiation dynamic evolutions, I should know. Thanks for playing doc!

    7. Re:I can't wait to hear it by Dunbal · · Score: 1

      Where in the article does it talk about back-scatter? Nowhere. These machines are designed to search body cavities, not peek under your clothing.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    8. Re:I can't wait to hear it by __aaxtnf2500 · · Score: 1

      Scattering is the process by which a radiation flux vector field is "diverted to where it wasn't originally aimed," to put it simply.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backscatter
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scattering
      I respect your understanding of the mechanisms of biological damage caused by radiation fields.
      On the basis of your status as a doctor, I believe that you have a basic understanding of radiation. That doesn't include a quantitative or qualitative knowledge of the dynamics of flux scattering and typical doses with respect to flux density, particle energy, and distance. I am not going to attempt to calculate the annual dose to the average operator, because it is tedious and the outcome will be that it is safe. Safe is a relative term. By safe I mean the operator is more likely to die in an automobile accident on the way to work than from an excess cancer caused by the x-ray machine. Research the effects of these doses on your own, and as a rational physician, you will appreciate the relative danger.
      Thank you for what you do.

    9. Re:I can't wait to hear it by Dunbal · · Score: 1

      You're welcome. But I wouldn't be able to do any of it without electricity. So thank you, too.

      I guess we'll know the real world risk over time in the real world - the tried and tested method. My training just causes me to jump at the possibility of ANY risk. There's a reason we stopped handing out routine chest X-rays, there's a reason we cover up people's genitals, there's a reason we don't X-ray pregnant women, and there's a reason we limit mammographies to women over 50 unless we strongly suspect something. When you start screening an entire population, you start picking up all the people with weird mutations who are extremely sensitive to radiation for one reason or another even though Joe (or Jane) Average would just shrug off such a tiny dose.

      As a physician I am not allowed to kill them just because they are mutants. Not even one of them.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    10. Re:I can't wait to hear it by __aaxtnf2500 · · Score: 1

      Well, officially you can't kill mutants. We all know that medication is good, and even though it's essentially statistically impossible that someone prescribed more than 8 medications is not having potentially serious contra-indications, it's still a good idea to give a mutant as much medicine as possible.

    11. Re:I can't wait to hear it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know, you dont help your case when you throw garbage or irrelevant arguments in-- like your claim that them needlessly scanning you and missing a medical issue implicates them in said issue.

      Are you responsible for someones death if you see them, and see their mole, but dont realize its really malignant melanoma?

    12. Re:I can't wait to hear it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Security personnel can stick their finger up your ass. You think a scan is *more* invasive?

      As for (2), you're being ridiculous. You're effectively saying that because X-rays are used in medical diagnosis, then any time an X-ray is taken anywhere it should be checked by a doctor "just in case". Now apply that argument to thermometers.

  18. Accreditation? by Baloo+Uriza · · Score: 1

    Will the people operating these scanners be required to be accredited by the ARRT as is the norm in hospitals?

    --
    Furries make the internet go.
    1. Re:Accreditation? by morcego · · Score: 1

      Santa Claus, Easter Bunny and an ARRT-accredited FSA security worker walked into a bar .....

      --
      morcego
  19. Training... by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 2
    From TFA:

    Specially trained customs officers would be authorized to screen the alleged smugglers.

    We can't count on actual medical personnel to be trained properly with regard to x-ray exposure levels...

    As Technology Surges, Radiation Safeguards Lag
    After Stroke Scans, Patients Face Serious Health Risks
    A Pinpoint Beam Strays Invisibly, Harming Instead of Healing
    Radiation Offers New Cures, and Ways to Do Harm

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    1. Re:Training... by electron+sponge · · Score: 1

      From TFA:

      Specially trained customs officers would be authorized to screen the alleged smugglers.

      We can't count on actual medical personnel to be trained properly with regard to x-ray exposure levels...

      As Technology Surges, Radiation Safeguards Lag After Stroke Scans, Patients Face Serious Health Risks A Pinpoint Beam Strays Invisibly, Harming Instead of Healing Radiation Offers New Cures, and Ways to Do Harm

      This is a very, very cogent point - one I was hoping someone would make. University educated professionals operating FDA approved devices have dosed patients with multiple Grays of radiation during a single instance of a well studied medical diagnostic procedure. Somehow we're trusting Billy Bob and Rayquan with similar equipment that hasn't undergone any FDA oversight at all? And now we've got even more powerful imaging equipment scanning our soft tissue? Which way to the freedom patdown line?

  20. Re:force companies to be non-profits that sell to by flaming+error · · Score: 1

    "Non-profit" doesn't preclude extravagant pay or egotistical motivations. Janitorial services and Production can be contracted out, so the "lowest paid employee" could be an engineer making $100K.

    The real solution is for The People to quit being terrified of boogeymen and start to use their brains. (A guy can dream, can't he?)

  21. Ensure a minimum of delay? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ensure a minimum of delay for legitimate travelers

    You mean they're gonna make sure that the minimum delay is not undercut?

  22. Re:force companies to be non-profits that sell to by phoenix321 · · Score: 0

    The whole economy would magically stopped being pushed if the executive salaries at these companies were capped at 10x the lowest paid employee and they had to be non-profits.

    Instead of multi-national corporations, it will be all forced-labor camps. You can still send some million people to work there, though.

  23. Telling remark... by jkusters · · Score: 2

    When someone uses the phrase "exonerate the innocent", it just says that air travelers are presumed to be guilty of terrorist activities and have to prove themselves innocent. Not exactly an American ideal, but American ideals are all too readily sacrificed on the altar of security theater.

  24. But.... by roc97007 · · Score: 1

    ...where's the personal touch??

    --
    Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
  25. How much are the devices? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So, 4,600 hours at say $30/hr = $138k. What do you want to guess *each* of these devices cost? Plus, since the scan is optional, who is dumb enough to agree to a scan if they are in fact hiding drugs in their ass?

  26. Rubber gloves? by sourcerror · · Score: 1

    I'm just wondering, why does the TSA officer wear rubber gloves. Isn't this supposed to be X-ray?

    1. Re:Rubber gloves? by EricWright · · Score: 2

      It's for when the x-ray comes back positive...

  27. What is wrong with this picture? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's become the norm for people to be treated like criminals. If you think this is so that we can be safer, think again.

    1. Re:What is wrong with this picture? by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 1

      It's become the norm for people to be treated like criminals.

      A step up in the world. It's been the norm to treat them as domestic animals for some time. B-b

      --
      Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
  28. Re:This Is A Good Thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Totally. If it wasn't for the heroic TSA terrorists would blow up American planes every day. These guys do an even more important job than the Marines, we need to give them the best equipment on the market.
    Their job is also way more stressful than Iraq. At least over there our troops only have to worry about explosions when they drive past a car or large obstacle. In airports, every passenger is a potential WALKING IED. And these guys just sit there while millions of passengers walk by them every day!!!

    I think people who fly should be escorted everywhere they go, even at home, by a police officer 24 hours before they go to the airport. It would make it harder for them to bring bombs on a plane then. This would relieve some stress from the TSA guys.

  29. Unnecessary X-rays in shoe shops were banned by JumperCable · · Score: 2

    In the US, they used to take X-rays of people's feet at shoe stores until they figured out that all of those unnecessary x-rays were a bad idea.

    http://www.museumofquackery.com/devices/shoexray.htm

    So what makes Australia think that subjecting innocent people to X-rays that have no medical basis is a good idea? What happens to the poor schmucks to get picked frequently for these types of searches?

    1. Re:Unnecessary X-rays in shoe shops were banned by QuantumPion · · Score: 1

      Well to be fair, the reason why the dosage of that old shoe x-ray machine was so high was because it had to illuminate a phosphor screen to be immediately visible, like a CRT monitor. With modern digital x-ray film, such a machine could be used regularly with no consequential dose, like a dental x-ray but only to your feet (which are less susceptible to radiation damage than your head or chest). That being said, I'm still patently against these intrusive airport x-ray scans for a multitude of reasons. :p

    2. Re:Unnecessary X-rays in shoe shops were banned by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      As someone who hasn't successfully made it though a security checkpoint in the last 5 years without "random" additional screening (usually the explosives test) this scares me. I'd rather take the glove thanks.

    3. Re:Unnecessary X-rays in shoe shops were banned by SleazyRidr · · Score: 1

      I don't mind the explosives test. It's not intrusive, fast and I imagine fairly effective. X-rays are very intrusive, won't be what you could consider fast, but they still might be effective. 1 out of 3 is a fail.

    4. Re:Unnecessary X-rays in shoe shops were banned by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What happens to the poor schmucks to get picked frequently for these types of searches?

      Every scan is logged in a federal database to which insurance companies have access to. After 5 scans you get flagged "risk" and your health insurance rates go up. After 10 scans you get flagged "uninsurable".

  30. Closing the medical loophole by Betaemacs · · Score: 1

    Of course this is necessary, hospital examinations are expensive and you just know there are freeloaders who purchase cheap tickets and act all suspicious in order to qualify for the free hospital exam paid for by Uncle Sam. Now if the high-school drop out that is running the "scanner" sees a mass, he won't know that it's a tumor and the freeloader doesn't get something for nothing.

  31. TSA? by OhHellWithIt · · Score: 1

    Thanks to a new type of X-ray scanner unveiled in Australia, annoyed TSA agents won't have to send you to a hospital for a body cavity scan, they can do it in-house.

    TFA is written in Australia and is about Australia. The Transportation Security Administration is a division of the USA government. (Or did we annex Australia and not tell anyone?)

    --
    "Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past." -- George Orwell
    1. Re:TSA? by morcego · · Score: 1

      Yeah, because the TSA won't be jumping into the bandwagon pretty soon, right ? They would never do something like that ...

      --
      morcego
  32. little more radiation than a chest xray I believe by k31bang · · Score: 1

    Internal Cavity Search? Sounds like a CT scan. I do not want that can kind of radiation dose unless it's prescribed by a doctor. Farther more, it better be free, and the scan better be put into my medical records for base line purposes.

    --
    -+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+ *** http://www.mountainfort.com *** +-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-
  33. Re:This Is A Good Thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    0/10

    go back to troll-school

  34. Easier usually equals "done more often" by MDMurphy · · Score: 1

    If it didn't involve a trip to the hospital you can bet it will be employed much more often. In the past I'm sure there were times the suspicion wasn't great enough for the hassle of transporting to the hospital. Now that it's easier the # of scans will go way up.

    Would the people operating be trained medical professionals?

    TFA mentions destruction of the results. Heck, if I just had my lifetime limit of full body scans reduced by 1 I'd demand a copy. Why should I have to endure, and pay for, another one after this at a visit to the doctor. Like having access to your medical records or FBI file, I'd want a copy of every intrusive scan they did of my body, on the spot. They're free to discard their copy, but I want mine.

  35. Innocent Travelers? by l0ungeb0y · · Score: 1

    "Affairs Minister Brendan O'Connor said the scanners would also help innocent travelers"

    We all know that after 9/11, there's no such thing as innocent travelers.
    The terrorists won, common sense and freedom were lost.

  36. Radiation worries... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Are TSA agents schooled on the ALARA principle / rad doses, et al?
    Even my dentist steps into the other room when the x-ray machine is running.

    Two Questions:

    1. What average doses of radiation are the passengers who use these machines receiving?
    2. Do TSA agents get checked for the amount of radiation they're being exposed to? If so, how often?

    1. Re:Radiation worries... by Thud457 · · Score: 1

      Therac-25 much?

      hell, that happened with alleged physicians in charge, not Wal-mart greeters from hell.

      --

      the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  37. There goes my weekend fun. by RightSaidFred99 · · Score: 1

    Now instead of gratuitous trips through security at the local airport I'll have to pay a hooker to do it.

  38. Human dignity sold out for 27kg of drugs by xednieht · · Score: 1

    WTF is going on - really?

    "Drug couriers captured by Australian authorities at airports last year were carrying a total of 27kg of drugs."

    Home Affairs Minister Brendan O'Connor, you sir are an ASSHOLE.

    --

    Hope is the currency of fools
    1. Re:Human dignity sold out for 27kg of drugs by KingMotley · · Score: 1

      Home Affairs Minister Brendan O'Connor

      Wow the Aussies really do have something over the US. Are these home affairs an opt-in type of deal, or does your federal taxes pay for it. Lastly, can you deliver to the US?

  39. Uh, How About Fuck Off and Die? by Phoenix666 · · Score: 1

    I already don't fly because of the TSA. I will not condone their behavior by complying like a sheep. They are a profoundly un-American entity, and must be de-funded and dismantled with prejudice immediately. Anyone who has chosen to work for them has self-selected for a one-way ticket to North Korea where they can enjoy the totalitarian paradise they're so strenuously trying to impose on the rest of us. They are not Americans who choose to do this; they are not my countrymen.

    TSA delenda est.

    --
    Do what you can, with what you have, where you are.
    1. Re:Uh, How About Fuck Off and Die? by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

      If you don't fly because you don't like being groped by a night-watchman school dropout, then the terrorists have won!

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    2. Re:Uh, How About Fuck Off and Die? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you feel better now? That's what I just love about Slashdot is all the hyped paranoia. If you don't like America please leave and if you are not from here then please don't bother visiting. We don't need your type of pussified ilk.

    3. Re:Uh, How About Fuck Off and Die? by Phoenix666 · · Score: 1

      If you think it's OK for the TSA to do this, would *you* please leave and not come back? We don't need *your* pussified ilk.

      --
      Do what you can, with what you have, where you are.
    4. Re:Uh, How About Fuck Off and Die? by Travelsonic · · Score: 1

      Disliking the TSA IS NOT THE SAME AS NOT LIKING America, you fucking moron, please fuck off.

      --
      If you believe in privacy, and believe you have "nothing to hide" at the same time, you're a goddammed idiot
  40. Not new, that's an AS&E Z-backscatter machine by Animats · · Score: 1

    That's not new. That's a standard AS&E Z-backscatter scanner. The first one was installed in the US at Sky Harbor Airport, Pheonix, AZ in 2007. As of 2010, there are about 68 US airport installations.

    They're very expensive, bulky machines. AS&E just got a phase II R&D contract from Homeland Security to develop a smaller, more portable unit. That's hard, though. The technology requires that the detector be 90 degrees from the emitter, with respect to the target, so it sees the backscatter. That geometry is why the machines are so large.

  41. Re:Only a matter of time before the TSA jumps on t by morcego · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Can no one realize that 9/11 was just a fluke

    It was not a fluke. It was so well planned that it doesn't ever need to happen again. The terrorists did the work once, and then left to the USA (and other) government to continue their work for them. Now, they can just sit back, relax and enjoy their ... hummm ... what do terrorist drink ?

    --
    morcego
  42. Oh come on by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 2

    The anus has been used throughout history to smuggle things, this shouldn't be news to anyone who spend a second in the real world. Are you THAT out of touch with reality you never heard of drug mules swallowing rubber balls filled with drugs or the reason in jail they get you to spread them?

    If this is the level of your average tin-hatter it explains a lot. You should really get out some day, talk to another human being. Learn something about the big scary world.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

  43. free healthcare... by inkscapee · · Score: 1

    ...is now at airports. OK. Cool.

    1. Re:free healthcare... by rcnut · · Score: 1

      Yes, I was just thinking it was time for my colonoscopy. Now I just have to figure out what's less expensive, the deductible on my insurance or a plane ticket.

  44. But, but... by Locke2005 · · Score: 2

    Can those who enjoy a good fisting still request to be probed the old fashioned way???

    --
    I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    1. Re:But, but... by need4mospd · · Score: 1

      I still frequently argue that acting excited about a strip search is the best way to avoid a strip search.

    2. Re:But, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It isn't... trust me - Scarface McTSAAgent went up the inside well past the 'resistance' limit - nope, being excited just means they find the agent who's excited too.

  45. Is this USA or AU? by CannonballHead · · Score: 1

    Is this talking about the TSA in the US? Or is there a TSA in the AU?

  46. Re:little more radiation than a chest xray I belie by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

    CT scanners are slow. I would guess this is a plain old x-ray machine with a digital sensor and a new idiot-proof interface. Just insert suspect and press button. It might even do some colorisation to try to make things with non-fleshy absorbtion profiles stand out more. Basically just like one of those luggage scanners, except with a more carefully limited dose.

  47. Well... If he did that on a plane... by denzacar · · Score: 2

    A terrorist could get up in the middle of a flight, walk over to a window, take his pants down, stick his ass up on the window, and...
    There you'd be thinking he was only mooning that... thing... on the wing... outside... when he would detonate.

    And just imagine if he was ALREADY sitting next to a window. Cause, that is what they do. They sit next to a window waiting to blow themselves up.
    Those shouldn't be called window seats at all but "terrorist seats".

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
    1. Re:Well... If he did that on a plane... by avandesande · · Score: 1

      The 'explosive decompression' meme is a myth.

      --
      love is just extroverted narcissism
    2. Re:Well... If he did that on a plane... by X0563511 · · Score: 1

      But decompression is still not a fun thing for the crew or passengers.

      There's a reason they pressurize them. Namely that it's loud, unpleasant, and impossible to fly at altitude for any reasonable length of time.

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    3. Re:Well... If he did that on a plane... by Skidborg · · Score: 1

      So you drop to two thousand feet and head for the nearest airport. Jets have suffered worse and survived.

      --
      Supporter of the +1 Over Dramatic mod option. In memory of apk.
    4. Re:Well... If he did that on a plane... by denzacar · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but that is your ordinary regular decompression.

      This would an EXPLOSION AND A DECOMPRESSION. It would be much more decompressier.

      --
      Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
  48. Fuck This Shit. by Low+Ranked+Craig · · Score: 1

    That is all.

    --
    I still cannot find the droids I am looking for...
    1. Re:Fuck This Shit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck This Shit.

      That is all.

      You know, we're a pretty open-minded bunch here, but I'm fairly certain that most of us aren't interested in your coprophilia.

  49. Re:Not new, that's an AS&E Z-backscatter machi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The first one was installed in the US at Sky Harbor Airport, Pheonix, AZ in 2007.

    I'm not sure where it was installed at because I've flown many times out of Phoenix since I moved here and didn't see ANY kind of scanner until the last time, in December 2010.

  50. A personal message from AC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As someone who has to fly in a few weeks, let me say this now:

    FUCK YOU, AIRPORT SECURITY PEOPLE

    Your job is pointless, you are mentally deficient, and I hate you.

    Instead of feeling my cock, suck it instead.

  51. Thank you! by denzacar · · Score: 4, Insightful

    TFA mentions how they "understood privacy concerns in relation to internal X-ray use". FUCK THAT!

    It's not a privacy issue. It's a fucking health concern.

    A fucking dentist covers you up in lead before he takes an X-ray of your teeth, and these morons want to let someone with a questionable understanding of buttons do X-rays of your gut?

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
    1. Re:Thank you! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's BOTH a privacy and a health issue, not one or the other! >_

    2. Re:Thank you! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought a fucking dentist made sure he knocked you out with gas first!

      Easier and less evidence that way!

  52. Re:force companies to be non-profits that sell to by Amouth · · Score: 1

    ..(A guy can dream, can't he?)

    wrong brain

    --
    '...if only "Jumping to a Conclusion" was an event in the Olympics.'
  53. They don't want people to fly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I know this is about Australia but it reminds me of what's going on in the USA. Considering the insanity the TSA has unleashed one might conclude that they have concluded that the only way to keep people safe from something happening on a plane is for them to be dissuaded against flying. If people don't fly then they don't have to worry about a terrorist hi-jacking their plane. Of course, it hurts an entire industry but people are safe. It's not like someone can destroy a building by driving a truck full of explosives into it. Oh wait, they tried that with the WTC and if memory serves, it was the placement of the truck that was off. Otherwise we might have x-ray scanners at toll booths instead of airports.

  54. Why O Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They do it so that people like you who 'shouldn't ever have to go through it' can find out what the rest of us are going through such that you can vote accordingly next election when you realize your politicians aren't representing you. Or any of the rest of us, for that matter.

  55. Will it reveal the... by Paracelcus · · Score: 1

    Alien larva living in my abdomen?
    Kree, Joffa!

    Seriously, just don't fly!

    --
    I killed da wabbit -Elmer Fudd
  56. Exonerate the Innocent? by Compulawyer · · Score: 1

    Here lies the presumption of innocence. 1793 - 2011. R.I.P.

    --

    Laws affecting technology will always be bad until enough techies become lawyers.

  57. Probable cause? by wrencherd · · Score: 1

    Are these scans "random", or is there some form of probable cause req.?

  58. Still not gonna stop terrorists by billcopc · · Score: 1

    You know, if a terrorist wanted to do damage, instead of getting on a plane, they could blow shit up ON THE GROUND! Like, say, in an airport full of people stuck waiting 5 hours to get on a fucking plane. There are more people in a public airport than in any single plane. Malls are even worse. Frankly, if someone wanted to "send a message" to the U.S., just do it on Black Friday amid the roving flash mobs of consumer whores.

    The world saw more plane hijackings in the 80's than in the 2000's. I'm way more worried about getting robbed and stabbed by some random meth-head in my apartment building, than getting blown up on a plane. At least meth heads can't afford airfare.

    --
    -Billco, Fnarg.com
  59. Do you get the record? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So, if you are going to force me to have the risk associated with radiation exposure of an X-ray, can I get the images?

  60. Re:Only a matter of time before the TSA jumps on t by Mashiki · · Score: 1

    Well in Canada, I can say that we've had at least 3 to 4 dozen failed terrorist attempts since the Air India bombing. Yet we're able to get along pretty well without the government being hyper-invasive over everything(laws are generally modified to fit the times/issues--aka modifying the wiretap act to include electronic information and so on). Despite all the whining over the terrorism act, it's done it's job without a serious problem to the vast majority of Canucks.

    Really I think it's because the government took a balanced approach to it. I mean we had the FLQ(ended with martial law, war measures act in place for a bit, and other stuff), we've had other idiots, and domestic terrorism isn't common but it's not unheard of(see idiots trying to blow sour gas lines out west, or the various flavors of muslims who've tried the kill parliment(at both levels), along with other crap). And yet I can still travel here without being body probed.

    I'm honestly surprised there hasn't been a full scale revolt in the US over this stuff.

    --
    Om, nomnomnom...
  61. Re:force companies to be non-profits that sell to by Peeteriz · · Score: 1

    Why would any sane company owner agree sell anything at all to TSA if your dream came true? They wouldn't be able to buy even toilet paper.

    The same for any other industry - either the companies would find a way to cheat it, or they would fire all employees, sell all assets and give the money back to creators/investors/owners of the company, as in that case it would be a better choice for the owners to just keep that money in the bank rather than make some goods or services with that.

  62. More internal cavity scans? by moloney · · Score: 1

    If it is now easier and quicker to do an internal cavity x-ray, I'm afraid that there will be many more internal cavity x-rays.

  63. kiwi eggs in an uncomfortable place by madmarcel · · Score: 1

    Cavity - Internal - Airport...

    A three word combination that will make any bloke nervous...

    But I suppose some people would welcome this new technology:
    "In September 2000, a NZ radio DJ was convicted and fined $1100 after impersonating a detective from Interpol. He called Los Angeles police and claimed his three co-workers were trying to enter the United States with kiwi eggs hidden in their "rear cavities". The trio were subsequently held for two hours at LA Airport, questioned and searched."

    His colleagues didn't think it was funny btw.

  64. Minimum delay by Graham+J+-+XVI · · Score: 1

    and ensure a minimum of delay for legitimate travelers

    You know what ensures even less delay?

    Not scanning them.

  65. Can't Afford Medical Care? by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

    Go to the airport. You'll get an X-ray, a breast exam, and if you mention Al Qu'eda you get a free colonoscopy!

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  66. Speaking as a nuclear physicist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I propose that all those lawmakers who are subjecting travellers/population-at-large to these devices are forced to undergo one thousand (1,000) scans in these devices, operated by the least trained operator, prior to the device going into operational circulation.
    This applies to each type of device and each revision/modification made to them.

  67. place bets now! by robi2106 · · Score: 1

    How Long Till Colonoscopy Scanners Roll Out States Side?

    PLACE BETS NOW!

    1. Re:place bets now! by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      I'm gonna say late 2011.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  68. Re:Only a matter of time before the TSA jumps on t by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Allah brand Haterade

  69. Scary math by sjames · · Score: 1

    Lets see now, that's 4600 hours spent on 200 scans or about 23 hours per X-ray. I know that since there's not a medical problem they'll go to the back of the line, but really, 23 hours.

    Meanwhile, only 1 out of 4 x-rayed was actually packing drugs. The total drugs found was 27 Kg,. They're talking about spending a lot of money and unnecessarily irradiating a lot of people just for 27 Kg of drugs in a year. I'd guess more than that goes up people's noses daily.

    I'm not sure if I'm happy to see evidence that the U.S. hasn't cornered the market on stupid over-reactions or sad to see further proof that it's pervasive and inescapable.

  70. Nice! by rrohbeck · · Score: 1

    I can't wait for the leaked X-ray pr0n pics.

  71. Re:Only a matter of time before the TSA jumps on t by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Heathen blood, I think. Dunno, lemme turn on Fox...

  72. Re:little more radiation than a chest xray I belie by SleazyRidr · · Score: 1

    except with a more carefully limited dose.

    Maybe.

  73. Re:Only a matter of time before the TSA jumps on t by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now, they can just sit back, relax and enjoy their ... hummm ... what do terrorist drink ?

    A tall glass of sweet irony on a hot desert afternoon.

  74. RTFA Morons! by godel_56 · · Score: 1

    Most of the comments I've seen here are complete bullshit!

    This has nothing to do with terrorism, it's all about looking for drugs in people who are already suspected of carrying drugs internally, not as a general screening device. It says in TFA that the existing scheme of sending them off to hospital had found 50 people carrying drugs out of 200 tested, which isn't a bad strike rate. BTW, most of the drugs are swallowed, not carried rectally or vaginally.

    This may be new for Australia but they've been using it in Britain for years. The X-rays are voluntary (in the UK), but if you don't agree you go into a cell until you have passed two complete bowel movements, so most people will prefer the scan.

    1. Re:RTFA Morons! by mbone · · Score: 1

      You have an odd notion of what voluntary means.

  75. Re:Health care crisis and terrorism in one fell gr by Darinbob · · Score: 1

    Don't you mean gate NC-17?

  76. Re:force companies to be non-profits that sell to by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    These invasive technologies would stop tomorrow if all US senators and representatives were subject to them when they traveled.

  77. Re:Only a matter of time before the TSA jumps on t by Bengie · · Score: 1

    They drink your sweet sweet freedom tears.

  78. Yoiu know where the TSA can put their scanners? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah, it's internal. First Amendment. Boycott airlines.

  79. what happens if you refuse the xray? by Cyko_01 · · Score: 1

    it's probably better if you don't know

  80. Passenger gets it all though by sourcerror · · Score: 1

    What about the passanger? What if I fly every week? I will get quite a dose.

    1. Re:Passenger gets it all though by __aaxtnf2500 · · Score: 1

      The individual dose is insignificant. The only traveler receiving significant annual radiation doses are flight crew due to increased cosmic radiation. It is still stupid that pilots get screened, from both a radiation health and practical perspective.

    2. Re:Passenger gets it all though by AmonTheMetalhead · · Score: 1

      Insignificant according to our current understanding of the effects of radiation on living tissue, we all know what happened to Madame Curie and prior the 50's. Even if the risk is insignificant to my health, i still chose to avoid that risk. I will not go through those body scanners and most certainly not through these things. If they want to search me, they"ll just have to drive me to clinic where trained personnel will do it.

    3. Re:Passenger gets it all though by __aaxtnf2500 · · Score: 1

      You choose to avoid all insignificant risks to your health? I have to assume you are trolling.
      You are going to miss your flight, be detained, then have pissed off nurses ever so gently probe your anal cavity, and if you resist the police will hold you down and they'll do it regardless of how much you resist? Getting cavity searched is extremely unpleasant, by design. Ever see crack dealers squirm when they know they are about to get cavity searched? It really sucks.
      "The Health Physics Society (HPS) reports that a person undergoing a backscatter scan receives approximately 0.05 Sv (or 0.005 mrems) of radiation; American Science and Engineering Inc. reports 0.09 Sv (0.009 mrems). At the high altitudes typical of commercial flights, naturally occurring cosmic radiation is considerably higher than at ground level. The radiation dose for a six hour flight is 20 Sv (2 mrems) — 200 to 400 times larger than a backscatter scan. According to U.S. regulatory agencies, "1 mrem per year is a negligible dose of radiation, and 25 mrem per year from a single source is the upper limit of safe radiation exposure". Of course, this is assuming you flew without your trusty tin-foil hat.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backscatter_X-ray
      http://www.epa.gov/radtown/cosmic.html

    4. Re:Passenger gets it all though by AmonTheMetalhead · · Score: 1

      You choose to avoid all insignificant risks to your health? I have to assume you are trolling.

      Nope, I'm serious. If they want to search me, they'll have to pat me down. Want to check my cavities? They'll have to get a qualified medic to do it. I'm not going to let high school dropouts point an x-ray device at me. It's not so much that i distrust the technology, it's that i distrust the people using it. And there's also the matter of principle, I'm not going to cooperate in that circus. As for the technology, avoiding unnecessary radiation exposure seems like a fairly sane position if you ask me. Oh well, it's moot anyway, I'm from Europe and I'm not planning of going to the USA as long as you guys have insane policies.

    5. Re:Passenger gets it all though by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The radiation dose for a six hour flight is 20 Sv [...]

      At least get your numbers right before you argue that X-ray is completely safe. After 20 Sv you would not stand upright for more than a second...

  81. Re:Only a matter of time before the TSA jumps on t by PeeAitchPee · · Score: 1

    I bet Ms. Janet Napolitano is wet just hearing about this*.

    I doubt it. Remember, we're talking about the same person who refused to go through the body scanners so we wouldn't see her giant cock.

  82. Intent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The goal of scanners,groping is to stop you from flying and be subservient to the cult governments/globalists. We know who did 911. Wake up!!!!
    The main concern is that you're fellow citizens, friends, neighbors ie: cops agree to do this to you and I. What's wrong with them?

  83. This one goes in your ear, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    this one goes in your mouth, and this one goes in you butt... No, wait! *This* one goes in your ear, and *this* one goes in your mouth, and *this* one goes in your butt...

  84. Double-Take by karlmdavis · · Score: 1

    This is so incredibly absurd I actually RTFA just to see if it was an Onion piece. As it turns out: it isn't.

    I wish it were, though...

  85. Babies by Culture20 · · Score: 1

    And after all these ways of determining if someone is carrying a pen knife, there is still nothing preventing someone from using a baby as a weapon. Not to smuggle a weapon. The baby is the weapon itself. You've got sonic attacks, biological attacks, those sharp baby fingernails... Heck, if the hijacker didn't care about the baby, he could use it as a blunt object. Good thing security folk are thinking up new ways to irradiate our gonads, because that means less babies to threaten air travel.

  86. Hurray for cancer! by AmonTheMetalhead · · Score: 1

    Yet more X-Ray radiation! Woohooo!
    /sarcasm

    I'll take the pat-down and trip to the clinic, i'm not going to let any TSA goon nuke me.

  87. Re:This Is A Good Thing by electron+sponge · · Score: 1

    I'm willing to sacrifice my liberty for some security

    Then you deserve neither and will most assuredly lose both (that is, if things keep going the way they are going).

  88. Dear Government of USA by speculatrix · · Score: 1

    The terrorists wanted to destroy your way of life - to take away your freedoms, to make you live your lives in fear.


    You have achieved their aims for them.

  89. Security Idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why not just put some chiseled Grizzly Adams looking mother fucker on every flight with a Remington 870. There's your deterrent, hell i bet wed save money in salary's and benefits over the costs to buy these damn things.

  90. A nice new tool for harassing passengers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Won't stop narco submarines and ground border smuggling. Drug smuggling is harder to stop than x ray scanning everywhere.
    And chances they will catch a terrorist are rather small anyway (if the don't have a tip).

  91. This is the war on drugs, not TSA by sco08y · · Score: 1

    This entirely about Australian airport authorities and the article does not mention the TSA. This whole setup is designed to expedite searching suspected drug mules and, in fairness, could get some of them to a hospital before drugs they've swallowed kill them.

    The real story here is that we wouldn't be hearing about this if it weren't for the war on drugs.

  92. Re:little more radiation than a chest xray I belie by electron+sponge · · Score: 1

    CT scanners are slow. I would guess this is a plain old x-ray machine with a digital sensor and a new idiot-proof interface. Just insert suspect and press button. It might even do some colorisation to try to make things with non-fleshy absorbtion profiles stand out more. Basically just like one of those luggage scanners, except with a more carefully limited dose.

    Actually, CT scanners aren't all that slow anymore. Back when the technology was first developed, it sure was. A modern CT scanner can complete a diagnostic on a major organ in a matter of a second or so.

  93. Is the Joker running the TSA? by jeko · · Score: 1

    The article references cavity scans for drug interdiction, which John Pistole swears on a stack of Bibles is NOT under the purview of the TSA. So, here's the TSA's logic.

    "We're afraid he's shoved a couple kilograms of C4 up his butt. Therefore, we're going to send him to a busy hospital in the middle of town filled with vulnerable people who can't be moved. That way, when the terrorist blows, not only does he get a body count comparable to the airplane he wanted to take down, he also disables the medical infrastructure that could have helped cope with the victims of the blast."

    It's like the guys running the show here thought "The Long Kiss Goodnight" was a how-to documentary. "We're going to maximize and facilitate terrorism to scare funding out of Congress..."

    I never thought I'd live to see the day that people in the Middle East were fighting for their freedom while Americans were flushing theirs.
     

    --
    He put his boots up on the table and made a face. "The sig," he smirked. "You can waste your life in search of the sig."
  94. Do we have a Constitution? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Out-of-control TSA, yet another violation of our rights. Add it to the list of gov’t violations of our right:
    They violate the 1st Amendment by placing protesters in cages, banning books like “America Deceived II” and censoring the internet.
    They violate the 2nd Amendment by confiscating guns.
    They violate the 4th and 5th Amendment by molesting airline passengers.
    They violate the entire Constitution by starting undeclared wars for foreign countries.
    Impeach Obama and sweep out the Congress, except Ron Paul.
    (Last link of Banned Book):
    http://www.iuniverse.com/Bookstore/BookDetail.aspx?BookId=SKU-000190526

  95. Re:force companies to be non-profits that sell to by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And I'm fine with the maximum executive salary being $1,000,000.

  96. Re:Only a matter of time before the TSA jumps on t by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    enjoy their ... hummm ... what do terrorist drink ?

    milkshakes

  97. The reason for FEAR by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Where can I buy these products chances are you already bought them long ago when YOU weren't paying ATTENTION

    1. Re:The reason for FEAR by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where can I buy these products chances are you already bought them long ago when YOU weren't paying ATTENTION

      Where can I buy these products chances are you already bought them long ago when YOU weren't paying ATTENTION

      Psychology is the game. Now if you don't know the game you have been duped.

  98. "... will more quickly exonerate the innocent..." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Majorly unclear on the concept: "the innocent" DO NOT NEED TO BE EXONERATED! They are, after all, *innocent*.

    I hate what's happening to our country. Do the Egyptian/Tunisian/Libyan rebels run mentoring courses?

  99. a good fisting any day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ha ha ha !!! yes id prefer a good fisting.... with a spiked glove..... a perforated bowel... rather than cancer ! ha ha

  100. and now by meerling · · Score: 1

    Now they can unconscionably drastically increase your radiation exposure without any valid medical reasons.

  101. Re:Only a matter of time before the TSA jumps on t by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It was not a fluke. It was so well planned that it doesn't ever need to happen again. The USA (and other) governments did the work once, and then left to the terrorists to continue their work for them. Now, they can just sit back, relax and enjoy whatever drink/drug they choose

  102. Re:Only a matter of time before the TSA jumps on t by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    in Canada, I can say that we've had at least 3 to 4 dozen failed terrorist attempts since the Air India bombing

    [citation needed]

  103. Seeing as you started the history lesson. by mjwx · · Score: 1

    Transportation was a punishment reserved for lesser crimes. For the most part people that the British transported to it's colonies were petty thieves, people in debt (punishment for being unable to repay debt was imprisonment (see: debt prisons) and transportation) and for many, just being Irish. Simply displaying an Irish flag was considered sedition in the 1700 and 1800's thus transportation was considered an appropriate punishment (real traitors had their balls tied between the hammer and the bell in Big Ben, at a quarter past the hour so they had to wait 45 minutes).

    Transportation was seen by the British parliament (as the monarchy had given up absolute rule in the late 1600's, 1666 I think) as a solution to Britain growing population problem as well as a method of getting rid of troublesome people.

    The really dangerous criminals, the murderers and rapists were kept in England, in English prisons. The reason for this was simple, there were no real prisons in the colonies and once a prisoner had completed their sentence the colonial government gave the prisoner a parcel of land and they were permitted to work it, transportation was a one way trip.

    --
    Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
  104. Until it gets hacked. by scurvyj · · Score: 0

    Metamaterials.

  105. Do Not Consent. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It would be helpful if the police were required to divulge exculpatory evidence discovered during questioning. They aren't.

    I am not a lawyer, but this guy is:
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc

  106. Re:force companies to be non-profits that sell to by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > The real solution The People to quit being terrified of boogeymen and start to use their brains.

    Right, after 50,000 years of existence of homo sapiens, about time finally.

  107. Support our President by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Will everyone please stop swimming against the tide and just go with this?!!! Our dear President McCarthy is having a troublesome enough time of things.... Look, we managed to get rid of those pesky Commie Russians - and now it's the Osama Muslims. After that brace yourselves 'cause we're goin' after the Canadians - not for their ideological beliefs mind you - just for their resources. After all they got oil and water. Aw shit - sometimes I feel like were the bullies in the school yard. And what YOU gonna do about it!??? God Bless the USA. (And fuck everyone else....)

  108. Re:Only a matter of time before the TSA jumps on t by boxwood · · Score: 1

    Uh they have RapiScan and enhanced pat-downs in Canada too. Just they ask you to go to a curtained off area of the airport to do it. Which to me seems even creepier. "Please step behind this curtain so I can see you naked or feel up your junk". The worst part is that none of the opposition parties have made any noise about this whatsoever.

    It was CSIS that told the Americans that Maher Arar was a terrorist which resulted in him being tortured. And speaking of CSIS, they regularly tap people's phones without warrants. The entire point of CSIS is to spy on Canadians.

    At least American citizens have some sort of protections from the likes of the CIA. Canadian citizens have no such protections and CSIS will gladly hand you over to them so you can be tortured.

    Don't kid yourself, the Canadian government does whatever the US wants them to do. Read the wikileaks about Canada. Our government is a bunch of spineless cowards when dealing with the US.

  109. Dont count on it. by glatiak · · Score: 1

    Besides being bemused about the phrase that the prospective passenger must prove their innocence (since when did we adopt the Code Napoleon approach?) there is the minor issue of having security folk operate the xrays. Heck, there have been items in the news about medical scanning being done improperly, even by 'trained' staff -- says that in the 50 years or so we have been blasting folk with ionizing radiation even the pros can screw it up. So to have this stuff operated by the typical knuckle-dragging TSA crew should be terrifying. I am wondering when the first lawsuit gets filed for excessive irradiation? Scares me!

  110. Damn... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Where am I supposed to stash my extra laptop batteries now???