Link
US 'stopped Dutch installation of full body scanners' - Times Online
Interesting!
Methinks the plot thickens.
Hmmm. I wonder why the Bush administration didn't want these scanners.
Hmmm. I wonder why the Bush administration didn't want these scanners.
:roll:
My question...What in the world makes anyone think that the US could have stopped ANY country from installing anything in their own airports?
As normal any problem that arises is the US's fault. And apparently even more precisely Bush's fault. :roll:
Because the company that makes the full body scanners is American, and the US government can and has prevented sales of technology to anyone they see fit.
They say 2008. Not precisely when, but... once Obi from Nairobi took his oath, Obi's administration could have changed the policy.
So... why did Obi from Nairobi not do anything?
That's the question. It's his watch now... you know... he's been elected for over a year.
.
Because the company that makes the full body scanners is American, and the US government can and has prevented sales of technology to anyone they see fit.
Do you have any examples of cases where this particular product with this technology has been prevented or is this your typical anti-American hyperbole?
Many sensitive goods and technologies (for example, encryption software) require a permit from the Department of Commerce before they can be exported. To determine whether an export permit is required, an Export Control Classification Number (ECCN) is used.
Bureau of Industry and Security - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I aint saying that body scanner technology is on this "sensitive goods and technologies" list, but if it were, then this would be one way for the US to prevent the Dutch and anyone else in getting their hands on the technology since it is made by a US company. And considering the history of the Bush administration in bullying nations to do their bidding, then I would not be surprised one bit that they blocked sale because it was only to be used on US bound flights.
Among the technologies that have been stopped by the US include encryption software made by US companies. The most well known example is PGP which the US government opened a formal investigation into for exporting illegally but no charges were ever filed. This was mostly because of the reaction of the inventor and the old term.. the cat is out of the bag.
The Department for Transport has claimed it cannot introduce full body scanners without first getting EU approval, and said the European Commission is meeting next week to discuss the issue with member states.
But the Tories and Lib Dems argued that EU approval is not needed where national security is an issue.
Theresa Villiers, the Conservatives’ transport spokesman, said: “If the DfT has been caught napping on getting EU approval for trialling full body scanners, then they will have serious questions answer when Parliament returns in a few days' time.
"EU bureaucracy should not be allowed to slow down our efforts to fully consider all the options when it comes to improving security at UK airports.”
Privacy concerns have delayed adoption of the scanners at EU airports.
Last month, the EU Transport Commissioner, Antonio Tajani, told Euro MPs that further testing was required to determine how such scanners might be operated.
"It is the Commission's view that the application of imaging technology as means of security screening at airports must be optional and passengers must be given the choice between them and physical control by airport screeners," he told the European Parliament.
He said the scanners currently in use "are demonstration means and cannot replace mandatory passenger screening through hand searches".
In October last year MEPs passed a resolution which said body scanners "cannot be considered mere technical measures relating to aviation security, but have a serious impact on the fundamental rights of citizens".
They asked the Commission to assess the scanners' impact on fundamental rights, health and travel costs.
WTH? You have no idea if anything in your claim is true, but if it were.... Well guess what, if the dog hadn't stopped to crap he would have caught the rabbit. :roll:Bureau of Industry and Security - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I aint saying that body scanner technology is on this "sensitive goods and technologies" list, but if it were, then this would be one way for the US to prevent the Dutch and anyone else in getting their hands on the technology since it is made by a US company. And considering the history of the Bush administration in bullying nations to do their bidding, then I would not be surprised one bit that they blocked sale because it was only to be used on US bound flights.
Among the technologies that have been stopped by the US include encryption software made by US companies. The most well known example is PGP which the US government opened a formal investigation into for exporting illegally but no charges were ever filed. This was mostly because of the reaction of the inventor and the old term.. the cat is out of the bag.
Just a few minutes with google would have solved this mystery:
Detroit terror attack: delay over airport X-ray scanners 'risking lives' - Telegraph
BBC News - Dutch press EU to adopt passenger scanners
It's not the US that is preventing implementation in Europe - it's the EU.
Privacy concerns have delayed adoption of the scanners at EU airports.
Schiphol's scanners are only used for European flights, and the US "still has to agree on the privacy issue," Ms Snoerwang said. "But this incident may make that quicker," she added.
WTH? You have no idea if anything in your claim is true, but if it were.... Well guess what, if the dog hadn't stopped to crap he would have caught the rabbit. :roll:
.
To be correct, you should have said That is why I made it up. :roll:No I dont, but the article in question does not explain much on why and how the US "stopped Dutch installation of full body scanners". Using this restrictive laws by the US for such matters is only logical and has been used before to attempt to stop the spread of high technology. That is why I brought it up.
To be correct, you should have said That is why I made it up. :roll:
.
No. Without facts one must speculate, and that is what I did. It is a fully valid reason as it has been used before to block and delay the transfer of "technology" to other countries.
In fact go to
U. S. Bureau of Industry and Security
and you will see what is required to have an export license.... yes, the US has licences on certain goods to be exported.
In fact when IBM sold its PC division to the Chinese, it had to comply with Federal requirements on security at IBM plants in the US where Levono employees were to be stationed. The levono employees had to be housed in separate secure areas of the IBM campus to win approval.
So it is very real when it comes to technology exports from the US.
You have credit sources to support this?Bureau of Industry and Security - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I aint saying that body scanner technology is on this "sensitive goods and technologies" list, but if it were, then this would be one way for the US to prevent the Dutch and anyone else in getting their hands on the technology since it is made by a US company. And considering the history of the Bush administration in bullying nations to do their bidding, then I would not be surprised one bit that they blocked sale because it was only to be used on US bound flights.
Among the technologies that have been stopped by the US include encryption software made by US companies. The most well known example is PGP which the US government opened a formal investigation into for exporting illegally but no charges were ever filed. This was mostly because of the reaction of the inventor and the old term.. the cat is out of the bag.
But you were making a very illogical leap from controls based on security reasons and extending it to institute controls for political purposes -- something which you have not been able to show.
There is no difference between control based on security reasons or political.
He's talking through his hat, he has no idea.Do you HONESTLY believe this?!?!?
Do you HONESTLY believe this?!?!?
:roll:
My question...What in the world makes anyone think that the US could have stopped ANY country from installing anything in their own airports?
Breaking into Lowe's. Next?Of course I do and I am 100% correct. Prove me wrong. Name a security issue that is not political. I can not see one at all.
Lets take full body scanners are as political as anything. The reason they are not in place in the US airports (and EU) is political. There are privacy issues thrown up by various sides and some sides are pushing the scanners for political reasons as well. Those that are pushing for full body scanners are doing so because they can see easy political points, aka popular politics not because of security, because the fact is that even if the full body scanners were in place they would not have stopped the Christmas bomber. They would also not have stopped the shoe bomber. And those pushing for these scanners are often those who are the first to shrug off privacy laws and the law it self in their never ending quest to "secure" the nation.
Or lets take the entrance requirements into the US. Security? not really, political. Politicians had to show they were doing something after 9/11 so they put in place security practices that look good, but in reality dont provide much more security than before since the intelligence services still dont talk to each other to prevent attacks as we see... also this is political. Does announcing a few days in advance the arrival of a Dane or Brit to the US actually improve security? Not really, all it does it make it politically viable to block entrance for certain unwanted persons.. putting in Visa requirements would have done that too and they continue to be required for all the "trouble" areas of the world. There was no reason to put in the arsine "security" issues coming from Europe other than political. The US did at the time not "trust" certain countries in Europe that had free entrance to the US before 9/11. It was 100% political.
How about information sharing between Europe and the US. Security? no, political again. Why do I say that? Because of the information wanted by the US and denied to the Europeans in return. And the fact that in the start the US wanted religions and sexual orientation as part of the information.. that was political big time. In the end the Europeans caved yet again and allowed the US to get tons of private information on any person wanting to go to the US, where as Europe gets almost nothing about Americans coming to Europe... great deal there...pathetic.
Or how about banning people with AIDS/HIV from entering the US for decades? What security reason was that considering people with far more viral diseases were given access to the US? It was 100% political put in place by an ignorant conservative government and renewed by government after government. It was based on religious dogma and ignorance. For example.. how could an American with AIDS be allowed to travel to another country and reenter the country? Or how about an American living in Europe contracting AIDS/HIV, being allowed back into the US just because he was an American citizen? It was political, not a security issue.
So yes most if not all "security issues" are political at the core.
Breaking into Lowe's. Next?
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?