One Hundred Naked Citizens: One Hundred Leaked Body Scans

[donnay]

One Hundred Naked Citizens: One Hundred Leaked Body Scans

At the heart of the controversy over "body scanners" is a promise: The images of our naked bodies will never be public. U.S. Marshals in a Florida Federal courthouse saved 35,000 images on their scanner. These are those images.

A Gizmodo investigation has revealed 100 of the photographs saved by the Gen 2 millimeter wave scanner from Brijot Imaging Systems, Inc., obtained by a FOIA request after it was recently revealed that U.S. Marshals operating the machine in the Orlando, Florida courthouse had improperly-perhaps illegally-saved images of the scans of public servants and private citizens.

We understand that it will be controversial to release these photographs. But identifying features have been eliminated. And fortunately for those who walked through the scanner in Florida last year, this mismanaged machine used the less embarrassing imaging technique.

Yet the leaking of these photographs demonstrates the security limitations of not just this particular machine, but millimeter wave and x-ray backscatter body scanners operated by federal employees in our courthouses and by TSA officers in airports across the country. That we can see these images today almost guarantees that others will be seeing similar images in the future. If you're lucky, it might even be a picture of you or your family.

While the fidelity of the scans from this machine are of surprisingly low resolution, especially compared to the higher resolution "naked scanners" using the potentially harmful x-ray backscatter technology, the TSA and other government agencies have repeatedly touted the quality of "Advanced Imaging Technology" while simultaneously assuring customers that operators "cannot store, print, transmit or save the image, and the image." According to the TSA—and of course other agencies—images from the scanners are "automatically deleted from the system after it is cleared by the remotely located security officer." Whatever the stated policy, it's clear that it is trivial for operators to save images and remove them for distribution if they choose not to follow guidelines or that other employees could remove images that are inappropriately if accidentally stored.

To the point, these sample images were removed from the machine in Orlando by the U.S. Marshals for distribution under the FOIA request before the machine was sent back to its manufacturer—images intact.

Continue...

[birther truther tenther]

What a bunch of propaganda

[donnay]

What a bunch of propaganda

I believe yesterday your wrote to someone in a post that they ought to READ the article first before making comments!  That's good advice, indeed!

"We understand that it will be controversial to release these photographs. But identifying features have been eliminated. And fortunately for those who walked through the scanner in Florida last year, this mismanaged machine used the less embarrassing imaging technique."

[birther truther tenther]

I believe yesterday your wrote to someone in a post that they ought to READ the article first before making comments!  That's good advice, indeed!

"We understand that it will be controversial to release these photographs. But identifying features have been eliminated. And fortunately for those who walked through the scanner in Florida last year, this mismanaged machine used the less embarrassing imaging technique."

So you're accusing me of not reading the article?

I posted a picture from the article at hand and compared it to one with full capabilities.

I even based my "What a bunch of propaganda" comment off of the very same excerpt of the article that you accused me of not reading, which I full well did read, otherwise I probably wouldn't have even made the reply in the first place.

I'm sorry if I offended you in that previous post about you not reading the article about SCOTUS and you accusing the grandpa of being in the wrong, when he was in the right, but inventing false slip-ups that aren't even slip ups just to get back at me is just infighting chickens**t.

[donnay]

So you're accusing me of not reading the article?

I posted a picture from the article at hand and compared it to one with full capabilities.

I even based my "What a bunch of propaganda" comment off of the very same excerpt of the article that you accused me of not reading, which I full well did read, otherwise I probably wouldn't have even made the reply in the first place.

I'm sorry if I offended you in that previous post about you not reading the article about SCOTUS and you accusing the grandpa of being in the wrong, when he was in the right, but inventing false slip-ups that aren't even slip ups just to get back at me is just infighting chickens**t.

First off, you did not correct me, and just for the record, are you the forum teacher?  Because, not only are you crass and rude, you are very condescending to boot!

The article states, that these Florida court house scanners, are NOT-- I repeat, NOT, the backscatter body scanners they are currently using in airports across the country.  I believe this bears repeating one more time:  "We understand that it will be controversial to release these photographs. But identifying features have been eliminated. And fortunately for those who walked through the scanner in Florida last year, this mismanaged machine used the less embarrassing imaging technique.

I am not trying to pick a fight with you, I am just trying to knock you off your superior high horse!

Good day!

[donnay]

Gizmodo Publishes 100 Body Scans

Illicit courthouse scans revealed
By Kevin Spak,  Newser Staff

Posted Nov 16, 2010 2:10 PM CS

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mJ4odo7T9w8&feature=player_embedded

  (Newser)  – Remember that courthouse that got in trouble for storing body scan images that were supposed to be deleted? Well, Gizmodo  got its hands on 100 of those photos with a Freedom of Information Act request, and has posted them in this video. “We understand that it will be controversial to release these photographs,” writes Joel Johnson, but it "demonstrates the security limitations" involved. "Fortunately for those who walked through the scanner … this mismanaged machine used the less embarrassing imaging technique.”

The images, Gizmodo notes, still haven't been deleted; the machine was sent back to its manufacturer with the photos still stored on it. All faces and identifying features have been blocked out, and the images are pretty grainy and low resolution—“especially compared to the higher resolution ‘naked scanners’” being installed in many airports. But hey, at least these photos appear to be real, unlike the last time Gizmodo tried something like this.

Read more...

[donnay]

Airport body scanner pics hit the Web, alongside vocal opposition to their use

by Dave Parrack

Some U.S. citizens really aren’t taking kindly to the use of full-body scanners at airports. And it’s the Web that many are turning to in order to voice their opposition.

It’s fair to say the use of the new full-body scanners at U.S. airports is causing quite a bit of controversy. Certainly more than when the same technology was introduced at airports in the U.K. Not only are some Americans objecting to the scanners on the grounds of decency, many are objecting to the fact that they’ll receive a dose of radiation every time they travel by air.

There is, of course, an alternative; which is to be manually scanned by a TSA (Transportation Safety Administration) official. But some of the people who are refusing to use the scanners are also objecting to the intimate nature of this “enhanced pat-down” search.

Two stories this week have really brought opposition to these practices to the fore.

Gizmodo today published details of how the rules governing these scanners can be abused. U.S. Marshals in a Florida Federal courthouse saved 35,000 images of people taken on the scanner, even though this is deemed improper and possibly illegal. These images were taken and stored at a courthouse rather than an airport, and they’re from a millimeter wave scanner rather than an X-ray backscatter scanner like the ones used by the TSA. However, the implication is clear: guidelines won’t necessarily be adhered to by everyone.

There is also the case of John Tyner, a software engineer who recorded what happened when he attempted to fly out of San Diego on Saturday. Tyner was not willing to go through the full-body scanner and so was asked to submit to a thorough pat-down from an official. He objected to the idea of a groin check, stating that “if you touch my junk I am going to have you arrested.” He feels the manual inspection is nothing more than “molestation,” and his argument has gained a lot of support on the Web.

I’m torn on this issue. I cannot see why people are getting upset at the images these scanners produce, saved or otherwise. They’re hardly pornographic, really only showing the outline of a person’s body. But the health issues for frequent flyers are more legitimate, and I can see why people who fly all the time would be against the scanners.

Read more...

[donnay]

Flashback: Feds saved over 35,000 nude scans from just one Florida courthouse


By Stephen C. Webster
Tuesday, November 16th, 2010 -- 5:24 pm

In light of flaring controversy over the Transportation Security Administration's enhanced pat-downs and nude body scan imaging systems, officials have continued to stress that detailed photographs of passengers' anatomy are not saved and do not get passed around.

But, that's not true in all cases. An attorney for the US Marshals admitted in August that over 35,000 images from a body scanner in an Orlando, Florida courthouse were recorded and stored.

Tech blog Gizmodo published 100 of the images on Tuesday, obtained via a Freedom of Information Act request, noting that marshals had "mismanaged" the machine. The photos are not of a graphic nature as they were taken using a less advanced scanning method than what's generally employed in airports.

The admission was first made in a letter by Marshal Service attorney William Bordley, in response to a lawsuit by the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC).

EPIC calls the body scanning program "unlawful, invasive, and ineffective," and has asked a federal judge to bring it to a halt. Complaints about the TSA's new screenings are increasingly popular among a cross-section of Americans, partisan and not.

"Advanced imaging technology cannot store, print, transmit or save the image, and the image is automatically deleted from the system after it is cleared by the remotely located security officer," the TSA insists. "Officers evaluating images are not permitted to take cameras, cell phones or photo-enabled devices into the resolution room."

To the contrary, "devices are designed and deployed in a way that allows the images to be routinely stored and recorded, which is exactly what the Marshal Service is doing," EPIC's executive director told CNET. "We think it's significant."

Janet Napolitano, director of the Department of Homeland Security, has insisted in recent days that travelers who object to the new procedures still have the choice to not fly.

Michael Chertoff, the former DHS director and a vocal supporter of x-ray machines, owns a security company that contracts with Torrence, California-based Rapiscan, one of two major manufacturers of x-ray body scanners. Under his control, the government ordered its first body scanners in 2005.

Read more...

[EvadingGrid]

Well, you will not see me walking through one of those radiation machines.

[donnay]

I'd like to know who edited this thread?  I know I didn't!

I'd like to know why three other people who responded have been deleted?  Their free speech just simply vanished into thin air!

Other people posted in this thread that the photo that birther truther tenther had posted has been photoshopped, therefore, it is more 'propaganda' being doled out here!

[amazon]

Donnay

Your signature seems to fit this situation well,
the one where you quote Infowarrior.

When I have been edited,
I receive a private message from the mod
who has taken the action
and I am given a reason why.

It only seems like good manners.

[donnay]

Donnay

Your signature seems to fit this situation well,
the one where you quote Infowarrior.

When I have been edited,
I receive a private message from the mod
who has taken the action
and I am given a reason why.

It only seems like good manners.

Thank you, Amazon.  I agree 100%. 

This is the photo that birther truther tenther tried to pass off as real:



Then other Prison Planet Forum members responding about it being photoshopped...it conveniently was removed from the original response, Birther made along with the members responses.  I would like to know who did this?

We know the photo is a phony:  http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=154635.0

[amazon]

Thanks for the clarification, Donnay

[Scootle]

http://911debunkers.blogspot.com/2010/01/god-dammit-i-hate-being-duped-by.html

[donnay]

http://911debunkers.blogspot.com/2010/01/god-dammit-i-hate-being-duped-by.html

Thank you, Scootle I know this now.  It is obvious Birther didn't realize this when trying to scold me yesterday, before the original posts had been edited and deleted--arbitrarily.

[Dig]

Donnay

Your signature seems to fit this situation well,
the one where you quote Infowarrior.

When I have been edited,
I receive a private message from the mod
who has taken the action
and I am given a reason why.

It only seems like good manners.

I broke the dam

I hate that f-ing image, Scootle exposed the Cointelpro operation to discredit us. Some still use it, I dump every new sign of it because it is just too distracting to have to explain the entire fricking thing all over again. Sorry for the abrasive methods, I did not mean to censor, just to stop the distraction that the image causes. All I know is that model is a moron for giving away that picture when she could have hired the LVJ lawyers to make millions. Anyway, hopefully people got the gist of things. If not I will summarize:

1: The nakes body scanners and the Nazi methods of scaring people into using them are so fricking illegal it is not even funny.

2: There are over 100 CoIntelPro operations going on to save Chertoff's cancer causing RAPE SCANNERS from utter extinction.

3: One of the methods is to "leak" images that do not show naked bodies when we know that the main purpose is to take naked pictures and cause cancer.

4: In the heat of the moment to try and illustrate this point, the now discedited "naked model" image has re-introduced itself into this forum. Please ignore it and carry on.

Anything I am missing?