Announcement

**Slimprofits** · November 24, 2010, 10:56 AM

Re: Expanded use of body scanners coming soon?

“[Terrorists] are going to continue to probe the system and try to find a way through,” Napolitano said

which is why this is all absurd. see Bruce Schneier in yesterday's NYT or on his website, i.e. security theatre.

We might as well cancel all air travel, no, let's go a step further and install body scanners at the exit point of every building (not just federal) in the U.S. And no one will be allowed to leave or enter without being scanned.

**don** · November 24, 2010, 11:01 AM

Re: Expanded use of body scanners coming soon?

The Good Ole USA.

That would be Ubiquitous Scanners of America.

(The campaign to create a replacement "threat" for the late, lamented Cold War appears to being going rather well)

**skidder** · November 24, 2010, 11:11 AM

Re: Expanded use of body scanners coming soon?

This isn't about catching terrorists.

http://homelandsecurityus.com/

"
As I wrote last week, the current TSA measures have very little to do with security. It is becoming much more apparent that the Department of Homeland Security itself, at its uppermost levels, has little to do with actual security. At the same time that the federal government is mandating the physical and constitutional violation of air travelers at our airports, they are prohibiting law enforcement officers in Arizona from asking for proof of identity and citizenship from those they suspect as being illegal aliens. They are also planning to remove the token presence of National Guard troops from our southern border by the end of February. So much for security.
This entire scenario would be difficult to reconcile in logical terms, or to simply laugh off and blame it on the inefficiency of government, until you probe deeper into �their� agenda.
The American people are being carefully and deliberately conditioned to accept the stripping away of our Constitutional rights, a process in the making for nearly a century. To see how far this conditioning has progressed, just look at how many people are willing to be groped, fondled, nuked, and subjected to other forms of degrading tactics by agents of the federal government for the mere illusion of security. They reason that if it will make air travel safer to have their genitalia fondled, that it is a �necessary evil.� Well, they are only half correct; it is indeed evil, but not necessary.
At what point will these �grope-a-dopes� draw the line and consider the actions of the government a provocation? When will people begin to connect the dots of the globalist agenda and become non-compliant?
I believe that is the larger question being raised by the puppeteers behind the proverbial curtain.
The erosion of our rights has been in progress for decades and under multiple administrations, but with this administration in particular, there is more to it. Rather than ending this madness, the Obama administration has instead ramped up the very tactics that had progressives calling George Bush a criminal. Why? It seems that people cannot understand that under the umbrella of globalism, political party is irrelevant. Both sides drink from the same trough.
To see it as some do, which is some sort of political �payback� against the American people for the midterm elections results is, in my opinion, purposely myopic. It is much larger than that.
The continuity of criminalizing non-criminal behavior of free citizens while giving a pass to others transcends political parties and is an integral component of social conditioning. Although it did not begin with Obama, he is integral in accelerating the implementation of the global power elite�s goals and objectives. Like the sand in the top of an hourglass appears to flow faster as it reaches its end, so too does the agenda of the proponents of a new world order. We are now at that point in time.
It would be a mistake to believe that this administration is merely mishandling the current throw-down between the TSA and airline passengers at the boarding gate. It is not being mishandled, but carefully crafted into organized chaos designed to elicit social unrest. Anyone refusing to comply with the increasingly oppressive federal rules will be considered domestic terrorists, much like we�ve seen with individuals and groups concerned with our Constitution, second amendment rights, and pro-life causes.
Many wonder how a regime in Germany could have rounded up and sent six million Jews to their deaths. Well, this is exactly how. It begins through conditioning, involves nationalization, and relies heavily on the conditioning and on the malaise of the people. �They� are the power elite � the globalists, who do not view themselves as Americans and don�t care about national sovereignty and care less about state sovereignty.
Under previous administrations, we�ve seen the likes of Henry Kissinger, Zbigniew Brzezinski and countless others who were appointed to cabinet positions or advisors with designs on a one world government and consolidation of power among the global elite. Now, take a good look at who Barack Obama has chosen as czars, advisors and appointees. Look at what has been advanced within the last two years under Obama.
In addition to the social component, there is a large economic component to this madness as well.
Under Obama, the nation�s health care industry has essentially been nationalized, and facing financial difficulties, the government became heavily involved in the auto industry to the point of de-facto nationalization. Why not the air travel industry, which in 2007, was responsible for generating just over $1.3 trillion in economic activity, or 5.6% of the total U.S. economy. The airline industry employed over 11 million Americans who earned about $396 billion.
The enhanced screening at our airports is not helping the airline industry, a vital part of our economy and infrastructure, but hurting it. This nonsense has the capacity to deliver a death blow to the airline industry. Could this be part of the larger agenda? Just look at the history over the last two years, and I believe the answer will become quite evident.
Meanwhile, take a look back at the airports across the country, as tens of thousands will be huddled in confined areas just to board a plane for the Thanksgiving holiday. It is a recipe for disaster. But a planned one that should not surprise anyone who is paying attention.

Comment on this article at Canada Free Press

**skidder** · November 24, 2010, 11:14 AM

Re: Expanded use of body scanners coming soon?

another tidbit from a related article from the same site.

"
23 November 2010: Following the publication of my article titled �Gate Rape of America,� I was contacted by a source within the DHS who is troubled by the terminology and content of an internal memo reportedly issued yesterday at the hand of DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano. Indeed, both the terminology and content contained in the document are troubling. The dissemination of the [COLOR=blue! important][COLOR=blue! important]document[/COLOR][/COLOR]

itself is restricted by virtue of its classification, which prohibits any manner of public release. While the document cannot be posted or published, the more salient points are revealed here.

The memo, which actually takes the form of an administrative directive, appears to be the product of undated but recent high level meetings between Napolitano, John Pistole, head of the Transportation Security Administration (TSA),and one or more of Obama�s national security advisors. This document officially addresses those who are opposed to, or engaged in the disruption of the implementation of the enhanced airport screening procedures as �domestic extremists.�

Got that? You are now a domestic extremist if you refuse to have your junk fondled. These fuckers WANT a rebellion, no two ways around it.

**don** · November 24, 2010, 12:14 PM

Re: Expanded use of body scanners coming soon?

Invasion of the Body Scanners

By JAMES RIDGEWAY

On the eve of some of the busiest travel days of the year, airport scanners are causing hysteria�and with good reason. Never mind the puerile TSA screeners giggling at your naked body. It turns out that the things may pose serious health concerns. In a letter to John Pistole, administrator of TSA, New Jersey Congressman Rush Holt, a scientist and the Chairman of the House Select Intelligence Oversight Panel, raised the possibility that the machines might be carcinogenic.

In March, the Congressional Biomedical Caucus (of which I am a co-chair) hosted a presentation on this technology by TSA, as well as a briefing by Dr. David Brenner of Columbia University on the potential health effects of �back scatter� x-ray devices. As Dr. Brenner noted in his presentation and in subsequent media interviews, the devices currently in use and proposed for wider deployment this year currently deliver to the scalp �20 times the average dose that is typically quoted by TSA and throughout the industry.�

Dr. Brenner has pointed out that the majority of the radiation from X-ray backscatter machines strikes the top of the head, which is where 85 percent of the 800,000 cases of basal cell carcinoma diagnosed in the United States each year develop. According to Dr. Brenner, excessive x-ray exposure can act as a cancer rate multiplier, which is why our government should investigate thoroughly the potential health risks associated with this technology.

Various experts have questioned whether older people and children ought to be subjected to scanners, and whether people susceptible to or having melanoma and cataracts should undergo the scan.

Holt also questioned the efficacy of the body scanners, which would come as no surprise to critics who�ve been lambasting them for years. Last January, when the government�s appetite for body scanners got a big boost from the underwear bomber, there was skepticism about their ability to detect the types of explosives favored by would-be airline bombers. As I wrote at the time:

Known by their opponents as �digital strip search� machines, the full-body scanners use one of two technologies�millimeter wave sensors or backscatter x-rays�to see through clothing, producing ghostly images of naked passengers. Yet critics say that these, too, are highly fallible, and are incapable of revealing explosives hidden in body cavities�an age-old method for smuggling contraband. If that�s the case, a terrorist could hide the entire bomb works within his or her body, and breeze through the virtual strip search undetected. Yesterday, the London Independent reported on �authoritative claims that officials at the [UK] Department for Transport and the Home Office have already tested the scanners and were not persuaded that they would work comprehensively against terrorist threats to aviation.� A British defense-research firm reportedly found the machines unreliable in detecting �low-density� materials like plastics, chemicals, and liquids�precisely what the underwear bomber had stuffed in his briefs.

Just to be sure I am not going off the deep end on this subject, I emailed Steve Elson, the intrepid former Navy Seal who worked on the federal government�s Red Team, which was deployed in the years before 9/11 to test airport security by infiltrating through check points. This they did with ease; but no one ever paid any attention to their reports. Since 9/11 Elson has worked on and off with television crews, continuing to penetrate airport security carrying with him all manner of guns and IEDs, and for the most part avoiding detection. In a CBC program last year at this time, the Canadians reviewed the air security situation and found it to be wanting. The reporters also got hold of a redacted report from the Canadian transport people which raised questions about the effectiveness of full body scanners, especially when they are used in combination with metal detectors: A person passing through one machine after another would have to place their arms in different positions and the Canadians found the body scanners would fail to detect objects like rings or bracelets on extended arms because the mechanism could not reach high enough to take them in.

This morning�s Washington Post carried a list of people exempt from body scanning, including cops and military in uniform. I asked Elson about this, and he replied:

When I was traveling through Chicago last January on my way to Toronto to do an interview, I had some time between planes. Got a sandwich. No place to sit down so I literally walked into the back of a checkpoint that was enclosed by glass so everyone could see what was going on, sat down on a bench and ate my sandwich, and watched. Noone touched the pilots. Ergo, all I needed was a pilot�s uniform, bought or stolen, and a photoshop badge. Put explosives on my body, no metal, walk through, pick up my stuff and off to the plane. Likewise, I could do something similar on the ramp. Best time is in cold weather and snow storms. Do it as night approaches. People don�t care about security, just getting the job done and getting out of the weather. Steal a bag tag, make an unauthorized entry (no problem), walk up to a plane and throw it in with 50 lbs explosive.

Elson has always contended that the body scanner couldn�t detect explosives in body cavities. In his email he added this: �

The machine can see through a thin layer of clothing and probably detect explosives strapped to the body.� But he pointed out that Leslie Stahl on �60 Minutes� worried about exposing private parts, but noted she could see a woman�s bra. �If she could see the bra, that means she could not see through the bra. A bra bomb or explosives molded to the breast wouldn�t be seen,� he continues. �And a woman, because of her anatomical construction, could easily� bring a several pound IED fully assembled with timer, detonator, power sources right through the checkpoint. If scanned or patted down it would make no difference. Once on the plane she has the option to leave it in the plane�and get off.� Ellison warns that a well planned Al Qaeda operation, �if they did it right, could knock down 50 planes in 30 minutes. Think about what that would do to US air operations.�

In my opinion, the best answer to airport security is the mass deployment of dogs. Give me a friendly German Shepherd, and I�ll gladly submit to being sniffed, rather than patted, wanded, or scanned. But unlike the scanner companies, dogs have no powerful lobbyists, like former Homeland Security chief Michael Chertoff, to advocate on their behalf.

http://www.counterpunch.org/ridgeway11242010.html

TSA's Gestapo Empire

By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS

It doesn�t take a bureaucrat long to create an empire. John Pistole, the FBI agent who took over the Transportation Security Administration on July 1 told USA Today 16 days later that protecting trains and subways from terrorist attacks will be as high a priority for him as air travel.

It is difficult to imagine New Yorkers being porno-screened and sexually groped on crowed subway platforms or showing up an hour or two in advance for clearance for a 15 minute subway ride, but once bureaucrats get the bit in their teeth they take absurdity to its logical conclusion. Buses will be next, although it is even more difficult to imagine open air bus stops turned into security zones with screeners and gropers inspecting passengers before they board.

Will taxi passengers be next? In those Muslim lands whose citizens the US government has been slaughtering for years, favorite weapons for retaliating against the Americans are car and truck bombs. How long before Pistole announces that the TSA Gestapo is setting up roadblocks on city streets, highways and interstates to check cars for bombs?

That 15 minute trip to the grocery store then becomes an all day affair.

Indeed, it has already begun. Last September agents from Homeland Security, TSA, and the US Department of Transportation, assisted by the Douglas County Sheriff�s Office, conducted a counter-terrorism operation on busy Interstate 20 just west of Atlanta, Georgia. Designated VIPER (Visible Inter-mobile Prevention and Response), the operation required all trucks to stop to be screened for bombs. Federal agents used dogs, screening devices, and a large drive-through bomb detection machine.

Imagine what the delays did to delivery schedules and truckers� bottom lines.
There are also news reports of federal trucks equipped with backscatter X-ray devices that secretly scan cars and pedestrians.

With such expensive counter-terrorism activities, both in terms of the hard-pressed taxpayers� money and civil liberties, one would think that bombs were going off all over America. But, of course, they aren�t. There has not been a successful terrorist act since 9/11, and many doubt the government�s explanation of that event.

Subsequent domestic terrorist events have turned out to be FBI sting operations in which FBI agents organize not-so-bright disaffected members of society and lead them into displaying interest in participating in a terrorist act. Once the FBI agent, pretending to be a terrorist, succeeds in prompting all the right words to be said and captured on his hidden recorder, the �terrorists� are arrested and the �plot� exposed.

The very fact that the FBI has to orchestrate fake terrorism proves the absence of real terrorists.

If Americans were more thoughtful and less gullible, they might wonder why all the emphasis on transportation when there are so many soft targets. Shopping centers, for example. If there were enough terrorists in America to justify the existence of Homeland Security, bombs would be going off round the clock in shopping malls in every state. The effect would be far more terrifying than blowing up an airliner.
Indeed, if terrorists want to attack air travelers, they never need to board an airplane.

All they need to do is to join the throngs of passengers waiting to go through the TSA scanners and set off their bombs. The TSA has conveniently assembled the targets.

The final proof that there are no terrorists is that not a single neoconservative or government official responsible for the Bush regime�s invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan and the Obama regime�s slaughters of Pakistanis, Yemenis, and Somalians has been assassinated. None of these Americans who are responsible for lies, deceptions, and invasions that have destroyed the lives of countless numbers of Muslims have any security protection. If Muslims were capable of pulling off 9/11, they are certainly capable of assassinating Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Perle, Feith, Libby, Condi Rice, Kristol, Bolton, Goldberg, and scores of others during the same hour of the same day.

I am not advocating that terrorists assassinate anyone. I am just making the point that if the US was as overrun with terrorists as empire-building bureaucrats pretend, we would definitely be experiencing dramatic terrorist acts. The argument is not believable that a government that was incapable of preventing 9/11 is so all-knowing that it can prevent assassination of unprotected neocons and shopping malls from being bombed.

If Al Qaeda was anything like the organization that the US government claims, it would not be focused on trivial targets such as passenger airliners. The organization would be focused on its real enemies. Try to imagine the propaganda value of terrorists wiping out the neoconservatives in one fell swoop, followed by an announcement that every member of the federal government down to the lowest GS, every member of the House and Senate, and every governor was next in line to be bumped off.

This would be real terrorism instead of the make-belief stuff associated with shoe bombs that don�t work, underwear bombs that independent experts say could not work, and bottled water and shampoo bombs that experts say cannot possibly be put together in airliner lavatories.

Think about it. Would a terror organization capable of outwitting all 16 US intelligence agencies, all intelligence agencies of US allies including Israel�s Mossad, the National Security Council, NORAD, air traffic control, the Pentagon, and airport security four times in one hour put its unrivaled prestige at risk with improbable shoe bombs, shampoo bombs, and underwear bombs?

After success in destroying the World Trade Center and blowing up part of the Pentagon, it is an extraordinary comedown to go after a mere airliner. Would a person who gains fame by knocking out the world heavyweight boxing champion make himself a laughing stock by taking lunch money from school boys?

TSA is a far greater threat to Americans than are terrorists. Pistole has given the finger to US senators and representatives, state legislators, and the traveling public who have expressed their views that virtual strip searches and sexual molestation are too high a price to pay for �security.� Indeed, the TSA with its Gestapo attitude and methods, is succeeding in making Americans more terrified of the TSA than they are of terrorists.

Make up your own mind. What terrifies you the most. Terrorists, who in all likelihood you will never encounter in your lifetime, or the TSA that you will encounter every time you fly and soon, according to Pistole, every time you take a train, a subway, or drive in a car or truck?

Before making up your mind, consider this report from antiwar.com on November 19: �TSA officials say that anyone refusing both the full body scanners and the enhanced pat down procedures will be taken into custody. Once there the detainees will not only be barred from flying, but will be held indefinitely as suspected terrorists . . . One sheriff�s office said they were already preparing to handle a large number of detainees and plan to treat them as terror suspects.�

Who is cowing Americans into submission, terrorists or the TSA Gestapo?

Paul Craig Roberts was an editor of the Wall Street Journal and an Assistant Secretary of the U.S. Treasury.

http://www.counterpunch.org/roberts11242010.html

**c1ue** · November 24, 2010, 12:32 PM

Re: Expanded use of body scanners coming soon?

I actually don't think this has as much to do with terrorism, as it has to do with currency controls.

The body scanners make it all but impossible for Joe Six Pack to flee with anything on his back - gold or otherwise.

The rich can still do so via their private planes and boats.

**KGW** · November 24, 2010, 01:18 PM

Re: Expanded use of body scanners coming soon?

In the spirit of Phillip K. Dick: Thru A Scanner, Quite Darkly.

**flintlock** · November 24, 2010, 03:57 PM

Re: Expanded use of body scanners coming soon?

This is what you get with bureaucrats unleashed. Never let a crisis go to waste.

**ThePythonicCow** · November 24, 2010, 05:34 PM

Re: Expanded use of body scanners coming soon?

Originally posted by skidder View Post

Got that? You are now a domestic extremist if you refuse to have your junk fondled. These fuckers WANT a rebellion, no two ways around it.

This seems to be a common tactic for taming unruly humans. We are a rather unruly mob of pissants, you know. "They" piss on us (or far worse) until we react; then they use that reaction to justify a more violent response; repeat until we cower in abject submission (or die first.) Welcome to the wonderful world of pissant control, my fellow Americans.

My usual response to such is to do precisely what they demand (but no more) when they are looking, with minimum fuss or bother. Arrange where possible for them not to be looking.

It's rather like my reaction to an incurable disability or disease. Such does not run my life, nor is allowed to ruin it. Rather one seeks an efficient and adequate means of adapting, doing the best you can within the constraints imposed, while keeping an eye open for a cure or better remedy, if such ever shows up.

(The above describes the final stage, acceptance, of the usual stages of grief: denial, anger, bargaining, depression, acceptance.)

Note that acceptance does not mean you'd pass up a cure or better remedy, if such presented itself. But the search for such, or the rebellion against the apparent lack of such, is not the focus of one's life (*) ... until you see a crack in the door, a new vulnerability in the disease. Then you pounce on that, like a sleeping cat who just realized a mouse is walking over its paw. The mouse only thought the cat was sleeping; pity the mouse.

(*) well, not the focus, unless the disease is sufficiently severe that little else matters. Then while one might still feign acceptance, one is ever vigilant, ever probing the enemy, looking for any weakness.

**shiny!** · November 24, 2010, 08:42 PM

Re: Expanded use of body scanners coming soon?

So if I'm summoned to court for say a hearing or jury duty and refuse to submit to either a dangerous X-ray with nude photo, or a physical violation of my body, would I be charged with contempt of court?

**Master Shake** · November 24, 2010, 11:55 PM

Re: Expanded use of body scanners coming soon?

Paul Craig Roberts has Nazi Tourettes.