Not really, actually, quite intellectually dishonest. No WBI [body imaging] DNOES NOT EQUATE to no security measures. Thew people who opt out still get checked. If something were to go wrong, I wouldn't go about saying "oh, so-and-so should be done, such and such should have to do XYZ..." no, I would find the problem and fix it - fire incompetent people [plenty in the TSA] if possible, change policies, etc, not look for more reasons to make the airport security check needlessly invasive and time consuming for the passengers.
BTW: the chance of getting killed in a plane crash by terrorists is on par [of not more unlikely] than getting struck by lightning. Blind supporters of this call the opposition fear mongers, yet are willing to support putting in technology that hasn't been completely tested, not completely proven effective or safe, in place for a microscopic possibility and condemn those who oppose with all sorts of hysterical emotional games. Kinda ironic really.
What there IS fearmongering? Good lord...thats the weakest response Ive seen here since...well...OK...yesterday...
Who is fearmongering? me for saying...the threat is real and we FULL ON expect the TSA to do everything reasonably possible to keep the airlines safe, or you and "dont look at my tiny pee pee on an X ray!" Oh...Im sorry...at your KIDS tiny pee pee on an X Ray...
Just who is 'afraid' of what?
Well it's not really an X Ray now is it. And realize some parents don't want junior or little Suzy's pee-pee and coochie being spread on the internet as masturbation fodder. Just call 'em crazy I guess huh?
Only transmitted them when placed for diagnostic purposes? How do they define transmitted? Wouldn't you need to "transmit" them from the image taking device to the screen being monitored by TSOs?
How does this make sense?
"There is no way for someone in the airport environment to put the machine into the test mode," the official said, adding that test mode can be enabled only in TSA test facilities.
...for the THIRD time.
I have yet to see this refuted.
...for the THIRD time.
I have yet to see this refuted.
The TSA documents I've posted already refuted it hours ago wen you first asserted this. Not only can they record, but these machines are networked, and they CAN be put into "super user" mode to record and save, per the TSA's own documents. So don't make it a FOURTH time being wrong.
If it "can" be done it "will" be done.
I know I should read the rest of the thread but the first page alone had me going crazy....
First, please present any indication that its SOP for TSA to "Strip search" people. ESPECIALLY 10 year old girls.
Second, so we are to simultaneously imagine that these people who are "minimum wage" dufus's as they're being described as a justification for why it would leak are dumb enough to leak it but smart enough to get:
1. Into the inner portions of these machines
2. At airport terminals where there is always other individuals around (as these are going into 24/7 Cat X airports)
3. Bypass the security measures in place
4. To take a few minutes to transfer the pictures to a zip drive
5. And believe they can load it up on youtube without being found out or are stupid enough to not think of it despite smart enough to do all of the above.
That is the strangest set of skills for a dumbass "minimum wage" worker I've ever seen.
You all realize these things aren't just like your common desktop sitting on a desk with a giant USB port showing itself to everyone with no security protection on the computer at all, right?
For ****s Sakes...
When 10 year old script kiddies can hack into banks from internet cafe's - is it really such a jump in faith to think that people who will work with these machines - day in and day out, won't get to know the passwords, how to bypass security protections or how to access the inner parts of it? Are you kidding?
First, please present any indication that its SOP for TSA to "Strip search" people. ESPECIALLY 10 year old girls.
Gotcha, so we're supposed to believe that the individuals working with these machines can't operate a "barf bag" but are able to hack million dollar machines with high level security on them in locations that are populated by average citizens and other federal employees 24/7.
Ockham said:I wouldn't trust these people with a a used barf bag ...
That makes tons of logical sense. We all know barf bags are seriously more difficult to deal with than extremely complex technical equipment.
This is a non-issue.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?