'Dear America, I Saw You Naked'
Jan 31, 2014, 6:52 pm
#32
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: LAS
Posts: 1,279
Feb 1, 2014, 12:23 am
#37
Suspended
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: CPH
Programs: Delta SM
Posts: 497
im not worried about body scanner as it keeps people not from america to blow them self up.....its ok too see all one body at a time like this...as its needed...feel save when going on plane.....vary happy to be an american that not put up with people that want to do harm.....smile)
Feb 1, 2014, 12:38 am
#38
Suspended
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: CPH
Programs: Delta SM
Posts: 497
Highlights from the article because I feel contrary today and decided that everyone needs to feel their blood boil:
bolding mine
yeah, sure. Subscription required.
if you see something, say something.
How generous of you. Who are you again?
Again! More is more!
Yeah!!! That makes it okay! I'm with you now!
Uhhh…. right. As long as they don't know the passengers identity, the picture's not sordid. How does that work?
So, is anyone's blood boiling yet?
Surveillance technology isn’t evil. It just has to be well-designed. In fact, what we need is more of it, not less.
TSA has provided peer-reviewed evidence that the radiation levels are safe.
He tells puerile jokes, revels in tales of ogling,
It’s tempting to dismiss the whole article as untrustworthy. But that would be a mistake.
this TSA memoir shows that our surveillance systems already incorporate some features that impede abuse—and that they need more.
prurient viewers, revealing images—was disrupted by the design of the technology. Notice what the author doesn’t describe: the passenger’s face. That’s because the system was engineered to blur this part of the body.
He tells this story to make the system look sordid. But what it really shows is how blind the image analysts were to the passenger’s identity.
So, is anyone's blood boiling yet?
Feb 1, 2014, 1:32 am
#41
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: where the chile is hot
Programs: AA,RR,NW,Delta ,UA,CO
Posts: 41,705
So I guess the author of this article would have no problem with the actions of the FAM who was caught taking photos up women's skirts as they boarded.
Because, you know, their faces weren't in the photos.
Even for TSA puff pieces, this one is a bit much.
Because, you know, their faces weren't in the photos.
Even for TSA puff pieces, this one is a bit much.
Feb 1, 2014, 2:08 am
#42
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,425
The author seems a bit behind the times.
Now let’s put those cameras in the I.O. room.
Feb 1, 2014, 7:17 am
#43
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Baltimore, MD USA
Programs: Southwest Rapid Rewards. Tha... that's about it.
Posts: 4,332
So, TSA's response is somewhat like Felonius Gru in Despicable Me 2:
"First of all, you got no proof that I did that. Second, after I did do that, I put it back!"
But TSA's response is more along the lines of, "We have never done anything like that, and we certainly don't do that any more!"
"First of all, you got no proof that I did that. Second, after I did do that, I put it back!"
But TSA's response is more along the lines of, "We have never done anything like that, and we certainly don't do that any more!"
Feb 1, 2014, 7:29 am
#44
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Baltimore, MD USA
Programs: Southwest Rapid Rewards. Tha... that's about it.
Posts: 4,332
Yeah, the FAM was just looking for underwear bombs. Since, you know, the AIT doesn't catch everything; if it did, there would be no reason for gate rapes.
Feb 1, 2014, 7:46 am
#45
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,657
You nailed it! The blog just posted a response at 4:54PM Eastern to this issue. And by a suit, not Blogger Bob.
First line:
"Many of the TSA procedures and policies referenced in a recent opinion piece are no longer in place or are characterized inaccurately."
Then goes on to say how much they've improved.
First line:
"Many of the TSA procedures and policies referenced in a recent opinion piece are no longer in place or are characterized inaccurately."
Then goes on to say how much they've improved.