I'm totally unsure as to what technique these images are shot at, BUT in scout films (which are low dose backscatter images for reconnaissance purposes) you can see nonmetallic objects in peoples rectums, and diapers, and shit inside of diapers, and even whether or not someone is wearing a tampon. I'd have to know what Kvp is used to make a better guess as to whether or not these scanners would pick up radiolucent materials lodged up into a rectum, but I'm fairly certain they will be high energy enough to see a diaper (since it's on the outside of the body).

but, i'm not sure how they're going to handle the diaper issue. lots of adults wear diapers and there's no way to tell on film if the diaper is soiled or if it's loaded with explosives. how embarrassing for everyone involved.


>> ^joedirt:


Why x-ray anyone when it can't detect anything in your rectum? What is the point? There is not safety in it.
You realize backscatter cannot detect someone wearing a diaper full of powder. The ONLY reason for any of this is the DHS director is making money for every new machine installed. PERIOD. The groping is only to make sure everyone "willingly" goes through the new machines, so as to justify buying more. PERIOD.

DERP DERPDITY DERP. I repair TV broadcast antennas, therefore radio waves are safe.

You do realize X-ray equipment can be dangerous? You do realize that these backscatter X-rays are nothing like what you are used to. They are low energy and only pass a few mm into the skin. I would say the backscatter isn't generally harmful to adults, but no one has studied effects on testicles, corneas or children, and all credible experts agree this will lead to increased skin cancer especially on the top of the head.

What if you fly daily? What if you are a cancer patient?

Why x-ray anyone when it can't detect anything in your rectum? What is the point? There is not safety in it.
You realize backscatter cannot detect someone wearing a diaper full of powder. The ONLY reason for any of this is the DHS director is making money for every new machine installed. PERIOD. The groping is only to make sure everyone "willingly" goes through the new machines, so as to justify buying more. PERIOD.
>> ^bobknight33:

I agree the radiation aspect is a non issue. I have been repairing X-ray equipment for 1/2 my professional life. >

Corporations and 'market forces' are how we got here. I know that by admitting that, you'd have to tear down your entire belief system and start over from scratch, and that's a lot to ask of anyone. I've got no problems attempting to treat the numerous symptoms, but this kind of shit is going to continue as long as big business is in the drivers seat.

In reply to this comment by blankfist:
Who said anything about them being the "brainchild" of Obama? You're stuck in that fallacious bipartisan thinking. Just because I've got a beef with Obama doesn't mean I an absolving Bush of his atrocities. But he's not "in charge" anymore, so to insinuate that these porno-scanners are in place now because of Bush's Administration is a fallacious and disingenuous argument. Let's go over the finer points:

First, the TSA today is under the purview of the Obama Administration, so anything it does is the fault of that administration. Period. The chain of command works like this: TSA > Department of Homeland Security (DHS) > Janet Napolitano > Obama. When Obama is no longer the president, then the TSA will be the responsibility of the new Administration... and so on.

Second, more porno-scanners are being added under Obama.

Third, the "enhanced security procedures" are being added under Obama. This includes touching of groins and the added frequency of the porno-scanners.

Fourth, Obama even admits the buck stops with him.

Lastly, Obama ran on a platform of "change". That change was meant to "correct" the ills of the previous administration, including the Bush Doctrine, FISA, the Patriot Act, and domestically the DHS. It hasn't been corrected. It's gotten worse.

Who said anything about them being the "brainchild" of Obama? You're stuck in that fallacious bipartisan thinking. Just because I've got a beef with Obama doesn't mean I an absolving Bush of his atrocities. But he's not "in charge" anymore, so to insinuate that these porno-scanners are in place now because of Bush's Administration is a fallacious and disingenuous argument. Let's go over the finer points:

First, the TSA today is under the purview of the Obama Administration, so anything it does is the fault of that administration. Period. The chain of command works like this: TSA > Department of Homeland Security (DHS) > Janet Napolitano > Obama. When Obama is no longer the president, then the TSA will be the responsibility of the new Administration... and so on.

Second, more porno-scanners are being added under Obama.

Third, the "enhanced security procedures" are being added under Obama. This includes touching of groins and the added frequency of the porno-scanners.

Fourth, Obama even admits the buck stops with him.

Lastly, Obama ran on a platform of "change". That change was meant to "correct" the ills of the previous administration, including the Bush Doctrine, FISA, the Patriot Act, and domestically the DHS. It hasn't been corrected. It's gotten worse.

Are we not speaking here of threats domestic? Apples and oranges. The apple cart is TSA/DHS/US airport security. Global is irrelevant excepting as players imported may act in the theater here thus affecting our internal security considerations and measures. Again, hijacking is all but not spoken of or a consideration in current domestic efforts. With all due respect, I see no argument or disagreement with your laudable research except as to its pertinence and relevance to this discussion.
>> ^L0cky:

I totally agree that the focus should be on bombs; however globally there are more hijackings and attempted hijackings than plane bombings and attempted plane bombings.
I can only find ten successful plane bombings; none of which took off in America; and four of which were found to be perpetrated by Islamists (3 of them from Libya), including the Lockerbie bombing. In four of those incidents the bomb was in the cabin; the rest were in the cargo.
Interestingly, while checking that, I did find support for my assertion that unsolved plots and acts are usually attributed to Islamists, while solved ones usually aren't.
The Russian airplane bombings in 2004 were originally attributed to an Islamic group; but then additional terrorist attacks took place shortly afterwards and it turned out the perpetrators were actually Chechen.

>> ^Shepppard:
okay, why did we need half a minute worth of his campaign footage, then another 30 of what's her face? I agree what the tsa is doing seems extreme, but pinning this on Obama seems silly, when as already pointed out, Mccain would have ended up with the exact same thing. they didn't personally clear this, what's her face did.


Good question. I'd like to not watch as much Obama images myself, and quite possibly this could be cut together by a Republican for all I know. Though it should be pinned on Obama, aka his Administration, because the TSA is part of the Executive Branch (chain of command: TSA > DHS > Janet Napolitano > Obama). And, these new pat down procedures where they touch your privates and the backscatter x-rays were implemented while his Administration was in charge.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'Ron Paul, House of Representatives, TSA, DHS, Boycott, Opt Out, Pat Downs' to 'Ron Paul, House of Representatives, TSA, DHS, Boycott, Opt Out, Pat Downs, HR 6416' - edited by MarineGunrock

Everything about this makes perfect sense.
>> ^GeeSussFreeK:

>> ^charliem:
Nothing helpful at all.
A single paragraph bill? Proposing senators go through it? (As if they don't already?)
Dont get me wrong, I like Ron Paul...but this is just, meh...wasting his breath really.

If you wanted to exact change, make the people who write it and the agents themselves...it is the quickest way to exact change. For example, make it law that all US employees could not have someone else do their taxes for them, they had to complete all aspects without any help whatsoever...you would have such a drastic change to simplify the tax code it would make your head spin.
I have also been considering an amendment to the constitution. That ALL federal legislation have a maximum time limit, let say 10 years. That way, any unpopular, or down right complete failures of legislation would expire without a huge act of congress (drug war, wars in general, war on terror, DHS, ect). Basically, we would keep what works, and what doesn't would fall away. (it would also bog down congress a bit, which was always the founders intent with the system)

>> ^charliem:

Nothing helpful at all.
A single paragraph bill? Proposing senators go through it? (As if they don't already?)
Dont get me wrong, I like Ron Paul...but this is just, meh...wasting his breath really.


If you wanted to exact change, make the people who write it and the agents themselves...it is the quickest way to exact change. For example, make it law that all US employees could not have someone else do their taxes for them, they had to complete all aspects without any help whatsoever...you would have such a drastic change to simplify the tax code it would make your head spin.

I have also been considering an amendment to the constitution. That ALL federal legislation have a maximum time limit, let say 10 years. That way, any unpopular, or down right complete failures of legislation would expire without a huge act of congress (drug war, wars in general, war on terror, DHS, ect). Basically, we would keep what works, and what doesn't would fall away. (it would also bog down congress a bit, which was always the founders intent with the system)

Since when is the fire department private? I was under the impression they were covered under the DHS?

What a crock. It's a Municipality thing, meaning that there may be no state or federal mandate that fire protection be provided in Tennessee.

My take on it is that it's horrible and misguided that the right keeps reigniting old debates I thought civilized society put to bed a looooong time ago (like torture, collecting evidence without warrants, imprisoning people without trial, separation of church and state, Title 2 and 7 of the Civil Rights Act, etc.). This is just another in a long line.

For me, I keep wanting to ask people "why do you care?" I mean, isn't it a good thing if people from Ireland or Mexico want to come here? Why not let anyone who wants to be a citizen just do the paperwork and background checks and become a citizen? If they come here, and make a life here even without legal status, and have kids here, what's the big deal?

If it's a matter of them not obeying our normal (as opposed to immigration) laws, or not paying their taxes, then we should deal with them in the same way as a citizen who breaks the law or doesn't pay their taxes.

The goal of this movement is to give government the power to deport whole immigrant families, including children born to illegal immigrants, without the complication of having to come up with a legal justification for "deporting" their natural-born US citizen children or forcibly splitting up the family by deporting the parents only.

Why is that so important to people that they want to alter an Amendment that was passed largely to overrule the Dred Scott decision?

I just don't get what people are thinking.

In reply to this comment by Ryjkyj:
Hey dude, what's your take on this fourteenth amendment bullshit? My wife discussed it a little bit with her co-workers this morning and they brought up some new: people-come-here-from-Ireland-etc-for-better-birth-care-and-their-kids-incidentally-become-citizens thing. I don't think I can support removing the 14th amendment for any reason but my wife's co-workers all seems to think it's a good idea.

Now here's the disturbing part: it's not like my wife works for some right-wing think tank. She's a social worker for the state of Oregon DHS...

Happy anniversary BTW.

Hey dude, what's your take on this fourteenth amendment bullshit? My wife discussed it a little bit with her co-workers this morning and they brought up some new: people-come-here-from-Ireland-etc-for-better-birth-care-and-their-kids-incidentally-become-citizens thing. I don't think I can support removing the 14th amendment for any reason but my wife's co-workers all seems to think it's a good idea.

Now here's the disturbing part: it's not like my wife works for some right-wing think tank. She's a social worker for the state of Oregon DHS...

Happy anniversary BTW.

>> ^shagen454:

...There is a huge Homeland Security building down the street from me. I bet someone in there reads everything on sites like this... the building looks like something out of Darth Vader's Empire, like it could be a huge square building coming out of the death star... so I want to take the opportunity to say, "hey Homeland Security lick my fucking taint you pieces of shit, come and get me you constitution burning rodent mafia douchebags!!!!
DHS would *never* do such a thing! That's the CIA's and the NSA's job!

At the end there i was just waiting for him to say -"now please sit down and wait, the DHS will be with you shortly".

Do you remember when Fox News was in an uproar because of a DHS report that warned against right-wing terrorism?

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/04/15/chorus-protest-grows-report-warning-right-wing-radicalization/