I guess I've just been off topic the whole time.

Good morning ladies and gents. Today we have a post, linked by BoingBoing, from a molecular biologist who looks at the TSA backscatter scanning machines and tries to determine whether they are safe.

http://myhelicaltryst.blogspot.com/2....html?spref=fb

It's hard to excerpt, but the bottom line is, "the jury is still out on whether these machines are safe or even could be made safe for this application."

This is a tough subject, because it is close to conspiracy theory when one actually questions the official line. I find most conspiracy theories to be near crazy. How could the Federal Govt possibly be using machines that could be unsafe? They SAID it was safe in official documents.

I don't think it's a conspiracy, except possibly at the manufacturer's level. There were two competing technologies for this I think, and we know that there was big money involved including millions spent on lobbying. The lesson from the Space Shuttle Columbia was that, in this era, the MBAs at the top are inclined to believe much different things than the engineers. They will force an atmosphere where their belief is the overriding one, because it's money involved. If they want it to be called safe, even if a 1-in-100,000 failure could hurt someone, it will be called safe.

After reading the original UCSF concerns, which I linked in this thread, and this post by the molecular biologist, there are pretty serious questions. It's not just a political tilt that now, I say, I would not go through these machines. I recommend you don't either.

http://www.democracynow.org/2010/11/23/headlines#5


Manufacturers of Full Body Scanners Increase Lobbying Effort

As the national debate over airport screening practices intensifies, little attention has paid to the increasing lobbying power the manufacturers of full body scanning machines have in Washington. USA Today reports L3 Communications has spent $4.3 million on lobbying, up from $2.1 million in 2005. L3 has sold nearly $40 million worth of machines to the federal government. Lobbyists for L3 have included Linda Daschle, the wife of former U.S. Senate majority leader Tom Daschle. Meanwhile Rapiscan Systems has spent more than $270,000 on lobbying so far this year, compared with $80,000 five years earlier. The company made headlines last year when it hired former U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff who has become a prominent proponent of body scanners. The CEO of Rapiscan’s parent company, Deepak Chopra, recently traveled with President Obama on his three-day trip to India.

It's interesting to hear from somebody that knows the science behind this shit. The calculation of dosage on some parts of the body is startling. Sure, a drop of sulphuric acid in your bath water won't do much damage, but when dropped on the skin it's serious damage.

But no matter what the dangers, the sheep public have voted this Thanksgiving weekend. I don't think is was worrying about the plane blowing up, as much as not wanting to be delayed. The same reason people take horrendous risks when they're driving, rather than getting where they're going 5 minutes later.

I probably mentioned this before, but decades ago in Israel I had to undergo a pat down to see a movie. While I had been subjected to a pat down before at a courthouse, this was the first time it had happened at a business.

Fortunately, the movie was "Three Days of the Condor", so the paranoia actually worked into the whole experience. It would have certainly put a damper on the event if it had been "The Little Mermaid".:right:

Seriously? I mean, I'm sure they're going for [rapid]-scan, but all I can hear in my head is [rapey]-scan.

Full body scanners - coming soon to a neighborhood near you.
How can any security manager NOT go down this road ?

AP
By P. SOLOMON BANDA, Associated Press – Tue Nov 23, 9:21 pm ET
Full-body scanners popping up at courthouses
CASTLE ROCK, Colo

Oh yeah, they are wanting them at subway stations and bus terminals...

At least courthouses are frequented every day by actual know violent criminals. Not like airports where it's normal people just trying to get where they are going.

he he he

Yeah, but airports are voluntary, refusing to go to the courthouse can get you indefinite jail time for contempt of court.

The government should try staying out of the process. Let the public know that the each airline is responsible for the safety of its own flights, and consumers can choose how safe they want to be. Maybe have terrorism liability clauses that pay indirectly proportional to how involved security is. You can get a low cost, no security check walk-on flight with Jet Blew (up), or a higher cost flight with more security from Scan And Pat Air.

But when the terrorists take down a plane, the political capital is huge. The loss to the country is more important than the people killed. On a large plane maybe 500 people, hell, we knock off more jaywalkers and bike riders than that.

A great personal tragedy for each victim and their families, but small potatoes to the country. That's why 9-11 was of such importance. 3,000 people isn't a blip on the national death toll, it was the attack on the nation that was important.

I feel 9/11 was such a big issue for Americans because
it was another "first" for our current generations,
just as JFK's assassination in the 60's was for those generations.
Each event came at times when our society was conditioned or
accustomed to being safe over several years.

The problem of safety is that you can never be completely safe.
It's a matter of how much risk you are willing to accept and at what cost.
That's what I was trying to discuss in my earlier thread about giving bin Laden what he wanted

I agree that this is the way things are, but it makes no sense. What does it matter where someone is killed by terrorists? Why are planes so freaking sacred?