A preview of the millimeter wave (X-ray) machines. It's confirmed. It does show everything!!! TSA must have a special hiring protocol for peeping toms. Two volunteers are shown going through the device. "Eric & Kathy" are idiots, IMHO. I can call them that 'cause "I'll never see them & they will never see me", right. That's TSA logic anyway.

What a crock!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This piece was pure propaganda. They used big black blocks to cover the genitals of the two "volunteers." How is that supposed to give the public adequate notice just what is shown to that anonymous screener? The public can't make an informed decision about going through the virtual strip search machine with this propaganda?

I'd rather take a pat-down from a registered sex offender. At least I can knee him in the big black box area if he gets fresh.

My point exactly. As I said "What a crock".

Is there a link to a video of this episode of heroic journalism?

It was buried on the Today show's website but here ya go:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540...09727#25509727

While it's arguable that this system is less personally invasive than a pat down, using this RANDOMLY is BS. We know that your 90 year old grandmother from Wichita isn't going to be carrying weapons under her clothes to attack anybody...so there's no reason for her to go through this machine "randomly". If she sets off the metal detector, then maybe that's another story.

As usual, they're looking for weapons instead of looking for terrorists. SNAFU

What non-metallic materials do mm-waves not penetrate? I see a new market in specialty undergarments!!

Could someone please explain the purpose of the double stack of bins & the x-ray machine behind Ellen during this piece of investigative journalism?

On the other hand, since NBC went to such great lengths to describe why & how they were covering the 'private parts', the Kettle's should now be able to tell for themselves that these images are not, despite Blogger Bog's best assurances, 'Reader's Digest friendly'.

Idiots.

So what makes you think that US airports are a good place to look for terrorists? The TSA struggles enough to even find prohibited weapons and bombs and the TSA does only worse looking for terrorists. [The TSA has had a "big catch" mentality since day one.] Given we know how good a job the government has done with Osama bin Laden -- presuming that there are those in government still looking for that terrorist nearing 7 years after 9/11 -- it doesn't seem there is any reason to have confidence that the TSA is up to the task of effectively looking for terrorists at airports.

I don't agree with the use of these machines because there's a failure of full disclosure by the government, but the approach of looking for a needle in a haystack by creating haystacks in which to look isn't any better either -- it's an even worse idea to create more needles (than the government has already done and continues to do).

typical media dog and pony b/s piece

so much did it cost the taxpayers?
was it a no-bid (i.e. haliburton type of "contract")
if a "bidded contract", what was/were the bid(s)?
who is the manufacturer?
why did the spokeshole for the tsa say that some of these (toys) will be placed after the wtmd? isn't the purpose to identify items before alarming?
etc, etc, etc.

what happens if there is a false reading and the pax refuses to accept secondary until they see a copy of the image. can you say d-y-w-t-f-t?

from the "blurred image", it looks like it's pretty explicit as if you look closely the man's image, you can see the top of a butt crack. no comments folks but just an observation that it does appear to show pretty explicit detail.

i still want to know what type of official (n.b. official) 100% guarantee here is that these images will not be kept, stored or otherwise maintained. i give it 6 months before images are posted on-line.

thank you but i'll take a good old fashioned SSSSecondary if you please

I can't believe how they glossed over the non-answer to the, "How graphic an image...," question. I also can't believe that volunteer Eric said, "If we just did it in front of six million people I have no problem with an officer at the airport...." I guess he missed the part about how they had to black out some areas of his body because they couldn't show them on prudish US TV.

Can someone tell Mr. Hawley that Leaders LEAD by example? If these are not explicit images, show us. Set machine on highest resolution, distribute a 1 MB .jpg of a test subject, let the public decide how invasive they really are. If Kip has any cojones he will step in the machine himself and show us. The resolution of the machine, I mean.

I just tried to watch it again. Matt Lauer obviously has no fear for his own civil rights, but then again he does seem to have a fascination for Ann Coulter.

I had to turn it off right after they introduced the test subjects. Totally disgusting action by TSA.

Until they have a total PASSIVE system (like reading your internal infra-red)
....FORGET IT.

I'm a engineer, and I wouldn't trust the programmers to keep the radiation levels below any safe level.

Forget it....not worth it.
And the more people going thru it...the more they believe its marketable.

Sure you may have to endure a pat-down, but when no one is using the machine, they'll give it up.

I'll take the puffer for explosives, but no way I'll do that one.

I'd put money on one of two bets regarding the "volunteers":

1. They work for TSA

2. The audience was polled to find people who would not object to being viewed naked (Eric's comment about 6,000,000 viewers indicates he was told ahead of time what to say).