Naked Body Scanners FAKE PICTURE

[Optimus]

I think by saying this is disinfo means you are missing the point. This is an illustration of how revealing the scanners really are as pointed out by EvadingGrid with the posted news article. To use an officially released scanner image from the TSA will not have the impact of waking people up to the fact it's an invasion of privacy and is also a means of strip searching people without having probable cause. The scanners images released by the TSA are most likely photoshopped to begin with in their effort to tone down how revealing the scanners actually are. Turn about is fair play.

[InfoArsenal]

That, plus I"m sure if it can do thin clothes it can do hair on people's heads through compositing. You cannot only get something that looks exactly like the forgery, but even better with the current tech.

The only limitation is the camera's capture resolution which is better than the press photos and will definitely be upgraded in time.

[kddcc1313]

exactly my point EG - this forgery changes nothing.  If anything, I am more concerned with the bombardment of radiation you receive walking through one of these scanners than the image it generates - although both issues trouble me greatly.

I mean I really refuse to fly until these things are dismantled.  Not only do they make me feel like a subhuman weed, but they are a freakin health hazard for christ's sake!  esp for testicular cancer!

agreed

[Scootle]

I think by saying this is disinfo means you are missing the point. This is an illustration of how revealing the scanners really are as pointed out by EvadingGrid with the posted news article. To use an officially released scanner image from the TSA will not have the impact of waking people up to the fact it's an invasion of privacy and is also a means of strip searching people without having probable cause. The scanners images released by the TSA are most likely photoshopped to begin with in their effort to tone down how revealing the scanners actually are. Turn about is fair play.

Yeh but Alex and Paul Watson are mistaking it as real when its a fake made by a german news site. Theres nothing wrong with using it as an illustration but making it out to be real, particularly with the lastest article about the inverting, is just going to discredit them.

[EvadingGrid]

Yeh but Alex and Paul Watson are mistaking it as real when its a fake made by a german news site.

There is nothing wrong with using it as an illustration but making it out to be real.

Particularly with the lastest article about the inverting, is just going to discredit them.

Exactly...

I must admit I panicked earlier on . . .

[davidnay]

Yeh but Alex and Paul Watson are mistaking it as real when its a fake made by a german news site. Theres nothing wrong with using it as an illustration but making it out to be real, particularly with the lastest article about the inverting, is just going to discredit them.

You're right. But they seem to like discrediting themselves..

[Optimus]

Yeh but Alex and Paul Watson are mistaking it as real when its a fake made by a german news site. Theres nothing wrong with using it as an illustration but making it out to be real, particularly with the lastest article about the inverting, is just going to discredit them.

Maybe there is someone who can contact Alex and let him know? And maybe tell him he should put something like "For illustrative purposes" under the pic.

[Viper]

Maybe there is someone who can contact Alex and let him know? And maybe tell him he should put something like "For illustrative purposes" under the pic.

Yeah to illustrate how dis-info looks.

[Mike Philbin]

Scootle,

great find,

I totally changed my blogpost to reflect this Bild.de f*kkup.



http://mikephilbin.blogspot.com/2010/01/airport-full-body-scanners-terahertz.html

[Jackson Holly]

Do we know who put the original pretty lady picture on the web?


~~~~~~~~~

This is important: The machines no doubt will have several different modes to view
the scan ... obviously the usual photoshop neg~>pos invert does not work ... it is not a straight
full-color neg ... however there is no doubt controls to use to get a true positive from the scan.

[kushfiend]

Do we know who put the original pretty lady picture on the web?


~~~~~~~~~

This is important: The machines no doubt will have several different modes to view
the scan ... obviously the usual photoshop neg~>pos invert does not work ... it is not a straight
full-color neg ... however there is no doubt controls to use to get a true positive from the scan.

scootle put a link a few posts ago, some German website

[ekimdrachir]

the only thing that could prevent this from going in, is people opposing it. thats why theyre doing all they can to make opposition look foolish.

[davidnay]

Maybe there is someone who can contact Alex and let him know? And maybe tell him he should put something like "For illustrative purposes" under the pic.

The picture is obviously fake as you can easily tell by the 'external' UV light sources on the sides of her luscious rack(an xray scanner would not pick that up), yet they intentionally posted it. Why? If they posted it for illustrative purposes they should/would have stated that and made it clear as day, but they didn't. Why not? Now this will be used to discredit us. Meanwhile AJ & Co will tell us 'woops our bad we forgot to put the illustrative purposes disclaimer', or 'woops we were tricked by those pesky trolls' and we will buy it and forget about it by tomorrow.
Either they are the worst journalists ever or they are intentionally discrediting themselves along with us.

[TheQ]

Drudge thought it was real too.. it's on his website.. 

[Viper]

Ok it did make it to the homepage on Reddit, but someone left this comment which needs to be checked out...

Quote from:
"This is not how the pictures out of those scanners look like...

For the record Scootle laid it all out for us and did his homework but rio made the original discovery.

[jofortruth]

The Naked Truth about Airport Scanners:
http://reason.com/archives/2010/01/07/the-naked-truth-about-airport/print

But last year, a bill sponsored by Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), banning the routine use of these machines easily passed the House, with the support of two out of every three GOP members. At the time, he warned, “The images offer a disturbingly accurate view of a person’s body underneath clothing, even allowing Transportation Security Administration officials to distinguish gender or see the sweat on a person’s back.”

I think it's more important to focus on the fact that these scanners do indeed reveal genitalia. That's the issue. We can discuss the pics given as examples all day, but facts are still facts and this needs to be rejected!


Here's a scan from the LIVE LEAK video (above) (look at the post with an attachment pic in the following thread. This is graphic!)
http://z4.invisionfree.com/The_Great_Deception/index.php?showtopic=7836&st=0&

[kushfiend]

For the record Scootle laid it all out for us and did his homework but rio made the original discovery.

either way the point is disinfo does not make it through the prison planet community filter.  that's why I love this site, no one is afraid to expose the propaganda, even when it could *supposedly* hurt our movement on the destruction of full body scanners.

People here are interested in the truth, the facts, and good journalism.  3 things completely lacking in the mainstream news, i mean propaganda, of today.

I see news drop on these forums weeks before i'll see it anywhere else - sometimes deceptions can sneak by, but usually gets called out eventually.  Now when msm tries to hit us with forgery charges a month or two from now, we'll be ready for their quackery.

[davidnay]

The Naked Truth about Airport Scanners:
http://reason.com/archives/2010/01/07/the-naked-truth-about-airport/print

I think it's more important to focus on the fact that these scanners do indeed reveal genitalia. That's the issue. We can discuss the pics given as examples all day, but facts are still facts and this needs to be rejected!

This particular thread is about the scanner photo being disinfo as the thread title makes clear. Let's not change the subject.

[Jackson Holly]

The picture is obviously fake as you can easily tell by the 'external' UV light sources on the sides of her luscious rack(an xray scanner would not pick that up), yet they intentionally posted it. Why? If they posted it for illustrative purposes they should/would have stated that and made it clear as day, but they didn't. Why not? Now this will be used to discredit us. Meanwhile AJ & Co will tell us 'woops our bad we forgot to put the illustrative purposes disclaimer', or 'woops we were tricked by those pesky trolls' and we will buy it and forget about it by tomorrow.
Either they are the worst journalists ever or they are intentionally discrediting themselves along with us.

I think you are being a bit hard on AJ & Co ...

I can't read the German site  ... can anyone else? Did they do this for 'illustrative only' purposes in a story about the scanner?

 ... but the point I'm trying to make is ... I feel sure the scanners can be manipiulated to show close to what the lady looks like ... probably without hair.

Here is a pic that shows the touch-screen on 'brightness/contrast' mode:

[thnkfstpal]

You're right. But they seem to like discrediting themselves..

Alex and Paul aren't perfect? OMG!!!!!!!

They seem to like discrediting themselves? WTF?

Let's see Alex is correct 8 out of 10 but let's focus on the two he gets wrong? Hmmm that's productive.

Thanks to scootle for pointing out the disinfo though.

[jofortruth]

This particular thread is about the scanner photo being disinfo as the thread title makes clear. Let's not change the subject.

Yes, I realize that. However, this takes away from the REAL ISSUE - THESE SCANNERS ARE GRAPHIC PERIOD! They are an invasion of privacy. We do agree on that, right? Lawsuits need to be filed by people to stop this intrusion! The people can not just roll over and take this! The people doing this don't know their limits and it's time they were told what those limits are.

[Viper]

Yes, I realize that. However, this takes away from the REAL ISSUE - THESE SCANNERS ARE GRAPHIC PERIOD!

I'm sure we're all 100% with you friend, we got a hatred of dis-info is all and it won't be tolerated.

[thnkfstpal]

The picture is obviously fake as you can easily tell by the 'external' UV light sources on the sides of her luscious rack(an xray scanner would not pick that up), yet they intentionally posted it. Why? If they posted it for illustrative purposes they should/would have stated that and made it clear as day, but they didn't. Why not? Now this will be used to discredit us. Meanwhile AJ & Co will tell us 'woops our bad we forgot to put the illustrative purposes disclaimer', or 'woops we were tricked by those pesky trolls' and we will buy it and forget about it by tomorrow.
Either they are the worst journalists ever or they are intentionally discrediting themselves along with us.

I think you are disinfo idiot. AJ and Co. Aren't f**kin NBC and DO make mistakes. What about that do you not understand dolt?

[jofortruth]

I think you are disinfo idiot. AJ and Co. Aren't f**kin NBC and DO make mistakes. What about that do you not understand dolt?

I agree thnkfstpal. Scootle I believe brought up what he thought was a legitimate point, but several others here are trying to keep the topic on this instead of talking about the real issue to do with the violation of privacy and our rights that these scanners represent. Typical of some individuals in this forum and in all forums sadly! I will be watching what these individuals say in other threads which will reveal their reason for being here. They eventually tell on themselves by how they speak. 

[hardrain77]

Well Drudge is carrying it in his headlines with a hilarious picture of Napolitano staring at the naked lady as Big Sis. So Drudge is taking the bait, probably in expectation of someone like Olbermann or Matthews debunking them and taking the left/right paradigm angle. If I was savvy enough to take a screen shot, I would've.

http://drudgereport.com/

[EvadingGrid]

Well Find from a Manufacturers Website.

Now get on with it !!!

[Piltdown Man]

Oakland Police ogle black man during strip search

[Blank Reg]

OK I assumed (it seems erroneously) that the picture, which was posted on INFOWARS.com, was authentic.  Perhaps Alex should have chosen a different image to illustrate his point.

Another point on this that no one is talking about...why do they assume that the only target a terrorist could want to hit is an airplane?  What's with the obsession with airplanes?  Obviously because the agenda is to normalize a prisoner/slave mentality.  Eventually we will hear chatter on the MSM that the same measures need to be applied to ground transportation since the frustrated terrorists will be looking for new targets, then a train will be false-flagged, then they will do the same to trains and buses.

[Mike Philbin]

Image > right click
Properties
URL > Copy
Insert Image
Paste

If I was savvy enough to take a screen shot, I would've.

http://drudgereport.com/

[Optimus]

The picture is obviously fake as you can easily tell by the 'external' UV light sources on the sides of her luscious rack(an xray scanner would not pick that up), yet they intentionally posted it. Why? If they posted it for illustrative purposes they should/would have stated that and made it clear as day, but they didn't. Why not? Now this will be used to discredit us. Meanwhile AJ & Co will tell us 'woops our bad we forgot to put the illustrative purposes disclaimer', or 'woops we were tricked by those pesky trolls' and we will buy it and forget about it by tomorrow.
Either they are the worst journalists ever or they are intentionally discrediting themselves along with us.

Do you have an unaltered body scan image just lying around? The only scanner images available right now are what the TSA has released, and they only show us what they want us to see. So until an unaltered, confirmed scanner images pops up on the internet, all that can be done now is to illustrate how intrusive the scanners really are. Even if the originator intended to pass it off as real, it still illustrates what is confirmed from news articles.

Full Article in "The Metro" a national paper.

http://img.metro.co.uk/i/pix/2009/10/airportxrayPA_450x642.jpg



'Naked' passengers to be exposed by airport scanners

A human X-ray machine which produces "naked" images of passengers was introduced at an airport today, enabling staff to instantly spot any hidden weapons or explosives.

The full body scanner, being trialled at Manchester Airport, will also show up any breast enlargements, false limbs, piercings, and a clear outline of passengers' private parts.

Some travellers might not want to be scanned because of the graphic nature of the images, bosses admit.

They can refuse to undergo the virtual strip search at Terminal 2, opting for the traditional "pat down" search instead.

But the black and white image will only be seen by one officer in a remote location before it is deleted, Sarah Barrett, head of customer experience at the airport, said.

"Most of our customers do not like the traditional "pat down" search, they find it too intrusive, but they still want to be kept safe.

"This scanner completely takes away the hassle of needing to undress. The images are not erotic or pornographic and they cannot be stored or captured in anyway," she said.

The scanner, made by the firm RapiScan Systems, makes the check-in process much quicker for passengers, who will not have to remove their coats, shoes or belts.

Frequent flyers do not need to worry about radiation from the low-level X-ray, she said, and a dental X-ray transmits 20,000 times more radiation.

"Passengers can go through this machine 5,000 times a year each without worrying, it is super safe and the amount of radiation transmitted is tiny," Ms Barrett said.

The scanners, which cost £80,000 each, were also trialled at Heathrow Airport in 2004. The Department for Transport will decide whether to install them permanently at the end of the trial, which is expected to last for a year.

Electromagnetic waves are beamed on to passengers while they stand in a booth, and a virtual three-dimensional "naked" image is created from the reflected energy.

Security officials in the United States have pioneered their use at New York and Los Angeles airports, and they are gradually being rolled out in other airports in the country.

The full body scanner, being trialled at Manchester Airport, will also show up any breast enlargements, false limbs, piercings, and a clear outline of passengers' private parts.

Some travellers might not want to be scanned because of the graphic nature of the images, bosses admit.

[jofortruth]

Do you have an unaltered body scan image just lying around? The only scanner images available right now are what the TSA has released, and they only show us what they want us to see. So until an unaltered, confirmed scanner images pops up on the internet, all that can be done now is to illustrate how intrusive the scanners really are. Even if the originator intended to pass it off as real, it still illustrates what is confirmed from news articles.

Exactly! The pics with the articles tells the whole story! There are many examples, this is just one (repeated from above):

The Naked Truth about Airport Scanners:
http://reason.com/archives/2010/01/07/the-naked-truth-about-airport/print


"But last year, a bill sponsored by Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), banning the routine use of these machines easily passed the House, with the support of two out of every three GOP members. At the time, he warned, “The images offer a disturbingly accurate view of a person’s body underneath clothing, even allowing Transportation Security Administration officials to distinguish gender or see the sweat on a person’s back.”

This is why he proposed legislation in the House on the issue:
http://z4.invisionfree.com/The_Great_Deception/index.php?showtopic=7857

Enough said!

[Dig]

The picture is obviously fake as you can easily tell by the 'external' UV light sources on the sides of her luscious rack(an xray scanner would not pick that up), yet they intentionally posted it. Why? If they posted it for illustrative purposes they should/would have stated that and made it clear as day, but they didn't. Why not? Now this will be used to discredit us. Meanwhile AJ & Co will tell us 'woops our bad we forgot to put the illustrative purposes disclaimer', or 'woops we were tricked by those pesky trolls' and we will buy it and forget about it by tomorrow.
Either they are the worst journalists ever or they are intentionally discrediting themselves along with us.

were you born an asshole or is it something you developed later in life?

the information is being purposefully blasted at light speed of over 100 various eugenics depopulation and enslavement NWO projects.

There are literally hundreds of thousands of stories running around at the same time.

AJ and Co are the most thorough in releasing very important and critical information in a timely manner with an over 99% accuracy.  In the past 2 years I can only remember a handful of discredited articles THAT STILL EXPOSE A GREAT THREAT TO HUMANITY!

If you think that these genocide degredation scanners are not a threat to humanity than you truly have shit for brains.

The images that you see from TSA are NOT NEARLY THE RESOLUTION AVAILABLE TO THE ELITE.

If you want to get some insight into the direction that these scanners are heading, watch the movie FUTURE WORLD.

More and more I am agreeing with AI on these scanners...

IF YOU COMPLY WITH GOING INTO THESE RADIATION AND DEGREDATION MACHINES THAN YOU ARE THE SAME TYPE OF PERSON WHO COMPLIES WITH GOING INTO THE NAZI DEATH CAMPS WITHOUT A PEEP!

[kddcc1313]

IF YOU COMPLY WITH GOING INTO THESE RADIATION AND DEGREDATION MACHINES THAN YOU ARE THE SAME TYPE OF PERSON WHO COMPLIES WITH GOING INTO THE NAZI DEATH CAMPS WITHOUT A PEEP!

absolutely!!!!!!! I am sick of all the pu$$y footing around....

RESIST THIS TYRANNY!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Mike Philbin]

...that's why I'm not going in.

It's TOTALLY UNCONSTITUTIONAL.



Fact. No justifiable cause even for a frisking of any passenger. Seriously. Why does no-one even question this shit?

[kddcc1313]

...that's why I'm not going in.

It's TOTALLY UNCONSTITUTIONAL.



Fact. No justifiable cause even for a frisking of any passenger. Seriously. Why does no-one even question this shit?

they are pussies.............

[EvadingGrid]

Next -- It will be
Body Scanners just to get into the Shopping Mall.

Figure it out...
think it through ...
do you think terrorisim will stop  ?
do you think they will not call for more security ?

First it is just International Flights
Second it will be all Flights
Third it will be Bus and Trains
Then to get into Shops
....
In the end they will require it for entry to all Federal /  EU Buildings


Now Stop moaning,
Go find the Manufactures Websites and post the proper genuine pictures.

[Optimus]

Yeah to illustrate how dis-info looks.

Same question I asked davidnay earlier...

DO YOU HAVE AN UNALTERED BODY SCANNER IMAGE FROM THE TSA JUST LYING AROUND YOUR HOUSE?

If you do, please post it.

[Viper]

Same question I asked davidnay earlier...

DO YOU HAVE AN UNALTERED BODY SCANNER IMAGE FROM THE TSA JUST LYING AROUND YOUR HOUSE?

If you do, please post it.

whatever, i've not been mean to anyone here.

[Jackson Holly]

Did you hear the caller say there were Mobile Scanner vehicles in his town?


WTF? 

[PullMyFinger]

I have no doubt the media is downplaying the detail of these scanners but this image can't be used as evidence for that. It's most likely a disinformation psyop to discredit us. Now that i think about it its obvious... the microwave scanners dont pick up hair!!!

You didn't get any flouride as a child I take it .Great find scootle,when will we see the vid?*wonders what kind of song he could make up about it*