What Japan Thinks about Airport Body Scanners In U.S.

[glenn kangiser]

Just to clear up - I am not bashing Israel.

I don't feel that any amount of US money given to it will buy any politicians a stairway to heaven as they hope either.

I just want them out of our policy making processes due to conflicted loyalties.  It would be nice if the money sent there went to refill the stolen Social Security coffers if we need to put it somewhere. 

Corruption is so rampant in our government it will not be stopped.

Not even Israel is so corrupt that they mandate nudie scanners for profit and cheap TSA thrills.  Our government makes sure that our corporations and politicians investments are taken care of with future taxpayer money.  That is the name of the game.  The scanners are just a vehicle to transfer the money to the elite, as are all of the other scams they come up with.

[glenn kangiser]

What your wives and daughters may be in for from the TSA,  ....

http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/972.html

[Windpower]

Shooter


Airline travel and tourism is already down 10 to 20 %    Implimenting a procedure that by some polls will cause 95% of people to be less likely to fly, will further cut into this part of the economy and will cause more job losses.



roughly 600,000,000 people fly in the US per year. If only a 10% drop in passengers results from this assinine scanning procedure

that is many millions of dollars lost


the X-Ray machine unavoidably subjects each passenger to ionizing radiation.

read the concerns of several PhD scientists here:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/ucsf-jph-letter.pdf

Ionizing radiation does have a negative impact on ones health at some level

One could argue that it is minor but, in fact, there have been no long term studies on the radiation these scanners have on human health.

One scientist estimated that since the X-Ray beam is highly focused as it scans your skin, statisically on a population each scan would subtract 45 minutes of life span.

for the sake of argument let's assume a very small, non-zero number of life loss per scan statistically on a population

Assume: .1 minute (6 seconds) of life span loss per scan

for 1 year of passengers (600 million) and we'll assume only one scan per passenger

that statistically works out to 400 person years of life span loss every year

What if it is 2 minutes of loss per scan --- you do the math

The point is they don't know -- but we do know that ionizing radiation negatively impacts human health


Even at this very low level of risk the scanners do not have a defensible risk/reward ratio

[muldoon]

Lie: The scanners are safe

"They have been independently evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration, the National Institute of Standards and Technology, and the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory, who have all affirmed their safety." Napolitano claims, expecting the public to simply swallow the claim that NIST and the FDA are somehow "independent" of the federal government.

As for Johns Hopkins University declaring the scanners safe, tell it to Dr Michael Love, who runs an X-ray lab at the department of biophysics and biophysical chemistry at the Johns Hopkins school of medicine. Love told AFP two days ago that "statistically someone is going to get skin cancer from these X-rays".

"...we have a situation at the airports where people are so eager to fly that they will risk their lives in this manner," he added.So, unless you count skin cancer as safe, Napolitano is lying to you.

According to other numerous real "independent" scientists who continue to speak out over the health hazards associated with the x-ray technology, the body scanners are far from safe.

John Sedat, a University of California at San Francisco professor of biochemistry and biophysics and member of the National Academy of Sciences tells CNet that the machines have "mutagenic effects" and will increase the risk of cancer. Sedat previously sent a letter to the White House science Czar John P. Holdren, identifying the specific risk the machines pose to children and the elderly.

The letter stated:

"it appears that real independent safety data do not exist... There has not been sufficient review of the intermediate and long-term effects of radiation exposure associated with airport scanners. There is good reason to believe that these scanners will increase the risk of cancer to children and other vulnerable populations."

The TSA has repeatedly stated that going through the machines is equal to the radiation encountered during just two minutes of a flight. However, this does not take into account that the scanning machines specifically target only the skin and the muscle tissue immediately beneath.

The scanners are similar to C-Scans and fire ionizing radiation at those inside which penetrates a few centimeters into the flesh and reflects off the skin to form a naked body image.

The firing of ionizing radiation at the body effectively "unzips" DNA, according to scientific research by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

The research shows that even very low doses of X-ray can delay or prevent cellular repair of damaged DNA, yet pregnant women and children will be subjected to the process as new guidelines including scanners are adopted.

The Inter-Agency Committee on Radiation Safety concluded in their report on the matter that governments must justify the use of the scanners and that a more accurate assessment of the health risks is needed.

Pregnant women and children should not be subject to scanning, according to the report, adding that governments should consider "other techniques to achieve the same end without the use of ionizing radiation."

"The Committee cited the IAEA's 1996 Basic Safety Standards agreement, drafted over three decades, that protects people from radiation. Frequent exposure to low doses of radiation can lead to cancer and birth defects, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency," reported Bloomberg.

Scientists at Columbia University also entered the debate recently, warning that the dose emitted by the naked x-ray devices could be up to 20 times higher than originally estimated, likely contributing to an increase in a common type of skin cancer called basal cell carcinoma which affects the head and neck.

"If all 800 million people who use airports every year were screened with X-rays then the very small individual risk multiplied by the large number of screened people might imply a potential public health or societal risk. The population risk has the potential to be significant," said Dr David Brenner, head of Columbia University's centre for radiological research.

[Windpower]

Kudos to New Jersey


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9H9HNEtrvEE&feature=player_embedded

[dug]

What your wives and daughters may be in for from the TSA,  ....

http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/972.html
Posted on: November 16, 2010, 07:42:24 PM

As if I needed any convincing, this interview confirms my views. I will never fly again unless it is absolutely necessary.

A lot of you may have lived your entire lives without having been subjected to this type of authoritative abuse but I have, more than once. Not at an airport (yet) but several times at border crossings (Canada and Mexico) and always when returning to the states, by American officials. Once you are spotlighted for interrogation you are temporarily stripped of all rights and are treated as an object, the fact that you are a human being and lifelong American citizen are completely ignored. Reasoning, or even talking to an official in this situation is futile, akin to trying to communicate with a pre recorded voice menu. Dehumanizing to say the least, and it really does shatter the illusion that you reside in a free country.

I'm not sure what it is about me, I know I am not the average Joe but I have always been respectful and polite by nature and have never been convicted of any crime worse than a traffic violation yet 3 of the 5 times I've been to Mexico, and the only time in Canada I have been detained, accosted, humiliated, and generally treated like dirt for no discernible reason.

The woman in the above interview may have been all for heightened airport security before this incident, but I'll bet she's not now.

[NM_Shooter]

Lie: The scanners are safe

Nonsense.  This is a perfect example of how data is misrepresented to make a point.  

By this very argument, then sunlight, gasoline, salt, Vit A, and cellphones should be banned too.  

[Windpower]

more TSA crap


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RhkQoiaf7Uc&feature=player_embedded

[ScottA]

Lie: The scanners are safe

Nonsense.  This is a perfect example of how data is misrepresented to make a point.  

By this very argument, then sunlight, gasoline, salt, Vit A, and cellphones should be banned too.  

So you are an expert on how radiation effects the human body?

Here's an example of another perfectly safe product that killed people.

The United States Radium Corporation was a company operated between the years 1917 to 1926 in Orange, New Jersey, in the United States. After initial success in developing a glow-in-the-dark radioactive paint, the company closed in the late 1920s in the wake of severe illnesses and deaths of workers who had ingested radioactive material when they licked their brushes to paint the thin lines needed on watch dials. Workers had been told that the paint was harmless.[1] During World War I, the company sold many of its watches to the United States Army for use by soldiers. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Radium_Corporation

[Windpower]

Lie: The scanners are safe

Nonsense.  This is a perfect example of how data is misrepresented to make a point.  

By this very argument, then sunlight, gasoline, salt, Vit A, and cellphones should be banned too.  

[ScottA]

A study conducted by Boian S. Alexandrov and colleagues at the Center for Nonlinear Studies at Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico[12] performed mathematical models how terahertz fields interact with double-stranded DNA, showing that, even though involved forces seem to be tiny, nonlinear resonances (although much less likely to form than less-powerful common resonances) could allow terahertz waves to "unzip double-stranded DNA, creating bubbles in the double strand that could significantly interfere with processes such as gene expression and DNA replication".[13]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millimeter_wave_scanner

[ScottA]

The health effects of the more common millimeter wave scanner are largely unknown, and at least one expert believes a safety study is warranted. "I am very interested in performing a National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements study on the use of millimeter-wave security screening systems," said Thomas S. Tenforde, council president. However, no long-term studies have been done on the health effects of millimeter wave scanners.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backscatter_X-ray

Not testing something does not make it automaticly safe.

[dug]

Just to inject a little humor in the mix-

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/17/taiwanese-tsa-cartoon_n_784709.html

Pretty funny Taiwanese animated take on the TSA situation.

[Windpower]

You just can't make this 5#it up !!






(CNSNews.com) - When asked today if she will insist that Muslim women wearing hijabs must go through full body pat downs before boarding planes, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano did not say yes or no, but told CNSNews.com there will be "adjustments" and "more to come" on the issue.

"On the pat downs, CAIR [the Council on American-Islamic Relations] has recommended that Muslim women wearing hijabs refuse to go through the full body pat downs before boarding planes," CNSNews.com asked Napolitano at a Monday press conference. "Will you insist that they do go through full body pat downs before boarding planes?"

"Look, we have, like I said before, we are doing what we need to do to protect the traveling public and adjustments will be made where they need to be made," Napolitano responded. "With respect to that particular issue, I think there will be more to come. But, again, the goal here, you know, we're not doing this just to do it.  We're doing it because we need to keep powders and gels and liquids off of planes that are unauthorized just as we need to keep metals off of planes.


more here

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/napolitano-adjustments-more-come-body-pa

[bayview]

   Mandatory chest x-rays and "enhanced pat-downs" in case of breast implant bombss.

/.

[NM_Shooter]

So you are an expert on how radiation effects the human body?

Little bit.  I've spent a fair amount of time doing research at the Los Alamos Neutron Science Center (LANSCE), and have done some work with heavy ions too. 

What's your nuclear background?

[MountainDon]

What sort of inspections will we receive when the suicide bombers start swallowing cndoms filled with explosives and the detonators is slipped up their rectum?

[ScottA]

So you are an expert on how radiation effects the human body?

Little bit.  I've spent a fair amount of time doing research at the Los Alamos Neutron Science Center (LANSCE), and have done some work with heavy ions too. 

What's your nuclear background?

The only nuclear experience I have is a number of years working on nuclear submarines. I had to wear a badge that recorded my daily exposure. I recived 60% of my allowed lifetime exposure during that time. And despite what they say you can feel radiation through a lead lined wall.

[Windpower]

What sort of inspections will we receive when the suicide bombers start swallowing cndoms filled with explosives and the detonators is slipped up their rectum?

You are exactly on target, Don

[muldoon]

Ron Paul puts forth legislation -  American Traveler Dignity Act

1 paragraph long.  simple.  removes immunity from federal government to do things that private people cannot do.  You cannot grope people.  You cannot take nude pictures of people.. if we did these things we would be arrested.  Governments role is to protect rights, not abuse them.  Seems reasonable to me. 

http://paul.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1796

C-SPAN video of him from the floor
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qwsdq69AHnw

Introducing the American Traveler Dignity Act 

Mr. Speaker, today I introduce legislation to protect Americans from physical and emotional abuse by federal Transportation Security Administration employees conducting screenings at the nation's airports. We have seen the videos of terrified children being grabbed and probed by airport screeners. We have read the stories of Americans being subjected to humiliating body imaging machines and/or forced to have the most intimate parts of their bodies poked and fondled. We do not know the potentially harmful effects of the radiation emitted by the new millimeter wave machines.

In one recent well-publicized case, a TSA official is recorded during an attempted body search saying, "By buying your ticket you gave up a lot of rights." I strongly disagree and am sure I am not alone in believing that we Americans should never give up our rights in order to travel. As our Declaration of Independence states, our rights are inalienable. This TSA version of our rights looks more like the "rights" granted in the old Soviet Constitutions, where freedoms were granted to Soviet citizens -- right up to the moment the state decided to remove those freedoms.

The incident of the so-called "underwear bomber" last Christmas is given as justification for the billions of dollars the federal government is spending on the new full-body imaging machines, but a Government Accountability Office study earlier this year concluded that had these scanners been in use they may not have detected the explosive material that was allegedly brought onto the airplane. Additionally, there have been recent press reports calling into question the accuracy and adequacy of these potentially dangerous machines.

My legislation is simple. It establishes that airport security screeners are not immune from any US law regarding physical contact with another person, making images of another person, or causing physical harm through the use of radiation-emitting machinery on another person. It means they are subject to the same laws as the rest of us.

Imagine if the political elites in our country were forced to endure the same conditions at the airport as business travelers, families, senior citizens, and the rest of us. Perhaps this problem could be quickly resolved if every cabinet secretary, every member of Congress, and every department head in the Obama administration were forced to submit to the same degrading screening process as the people who pay their salaries.

I warned at the time of the creation of the TSA that an unaccountable government entity in control of airport security would provide neither security nor defend our basic freedom to travel. Yet the vast majority of both Republicans and Democrats then in Congress willingly voted to create another unaccountable, bullying agency-- in a simple-minded and unprincipled attempt to appease public passion in the wake of 9-11.  Sadly, as we see with the steady TSA encroachment on our freedom and dignity, my fears in 2001 were justified.

The solution to the need for security at US airports is not a government bureaucracy. The solution is to allow the private sector, preferably the airlines themselves, to provide for the security of their property. As a recent article in Forbes magazine eloquently stated, "The airlines have enormous sums of money riding on passenger safety, and the notion that a government bureaucracy has better incentives to provide safe travels than airlines with billions of dollars worth of capital and goodwill on the line strains credibility." In the meantime, I hope we can pass this legislation and protect Americans from harm and humiliation when they choose to travel.

[peternap]

SAN MATEO COUNTY, Calif. (KGO) -- The San Mateo district attorney's office has a warning for all TSA personnel at SFO -- anyone inappropriately touching a passenger during a security pat down will be prosecuted.

Incoming San Mateo DA Steve Wagstaffe says any complaints of inappropriate touching during an airport security pat down will land on his desk.

"The case would be reviewed and if we could prove the elements of it, that it was inappropriately done with a sexual or lewd intent, that person would be prosecuted," he said.

[Windpower]

Makes me proud that I contributed to his campaign and voted for him for president

you go Ron Paul !

[glenn kangiser]

SAN MATEO COUNTY, Calif. (KGO) -- The San Mateo district attorney's office has a warning for all TSA personnel at SFO -- anyone inappropriately touching a passenger during a security pat down will be prosecuted.

Incoming San Mateo DA Steve Wagstaffe says any complaints of inappropriate touching during an airport security pat down will land on his desk.

"The case would be reviewed and if we could prove the elements of it, that it was inappropriately done with a sexual or lewd intent, that person would be prosecuted," he said.

I hope they enforce it and don't weasel out on no proof of sexual or lewd intent.

[muldoon]

it's not the onion either.  you just cannot make this up. 

http://www.greeleygazette.com/press/?p=6687

The head of Homeland Security has indicated the government is considering the request of an Islamic organization that has suggested Muslim women be allowed to pat themselves down during a full body search that is part of new enhanced procedures at airports.

[Pox Eclipse]

it's not the onion either.  you just cannot make this up. 

http://www.greeleygazette.com/press/?p=6687

The head of Homeland Security has indicated the government is considering the request of an Islamic organization that has suggested Muslim women be allowed to pat themselves down during a full body search that is part of new enhanced procedures at airports.

Even I got a giggle out of that!