Truth News Australia

Subscribe to TNRA
Subscribe to TNRA

How Full-Body Scanners Work – and Fail

24 March 2012 (Original: 2010-11-16) | Source | Permalink | comments: 2
By Hans

Categories: [ Full Body Scanners ]

TSA has been introducing full-body scanners to perform a virtual strip search of air travelers. Although technically travelers have the right to opt out, the TSA discourages this behavior with aggressive and invasive pat-down searches. Initially, TSA denied punitive pat-down searches. Then they acknowledged testing a “more aggressive pat-down technique.” TSA began a more widespread implementation of this tactic at the beginning of November, and TSA agents have reportedly been quite open about that fact that the “enhanced” pat-down searches are specifically aimed to be so offensive as to coerce passengers into the scanners. In a blog post otherwise bluntly supportive of full-body scanning (the title, “Shut Up And Get In The Scanner,” gives a good idea of the tone of the writing), one former TSA screener writes:

It is a terror tactic by TSA to get you to walk through the more thorough body scanner.  I can’t defend TSA on this one.  I have talked to the TSA officers and it is no more effective than the old pat down procedure.  They tested it out with trainers and each other.  It is purely a terror tactic by TSA.

Other bloggers (with sharper tongues and stronger stomachs than I) have exhaustively documented the steaming mass of epic fail that is the TSA’s new policy. The aim of this post is to explain how full-body scanners work – and fail.

There are two kinds of full-body scanners: those based on backscatter X-ray technology and those based on millimeter wave technology.

Article Continues »

Comments

Ppc account manager Hamano Tenhoff is addicted to evil eye beads workout routines and train collecting. Lastly she is is getting most her encouragement from chilling together with her family.

By murano glass pendants on 2012 04 24 - 12:48:27

PLEASE sign the petitions against this disgusting draconian and ILLEGAL mandate - and forward to ALL who you know!

http://www.change.org/petitions/anthony-albanese-stop-rollout-of-cancer-causing-airport-body-scanning-machines-in-australia


http://http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/stop-the-implementation-of-body-scanners-in-australian.html

Only your signature can effect change.

By Biggest Brotherest on 2012 06 06 - 11:32:54

Enter comments below, then click Submit:

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Listen Live

Recent Comments

FYI my research indicates that aerosols are no longer limited to persisting chemtrails.

By Cris on 2014 11 28 - 10:14:21
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

Andrew Adams wrote:

if [you] wish to tell us that there is no such thing as geoengineering, no plans to own the weather, no such thing as chemtrails, then it is up to you [...] to provide the proof

Remember that it was you who has made a very specific claim: that planes in your area were dispersing ‘stuff’ that was not frozen water vapour triggering cirrus spreading. You concluded that solely based on the fact that this was going on for several days in a row.

That is your opinion. I could just counter that with my observations from where I live in Europe where it is not at all unusual to have such a weather situation for a week or so.

To support your point you referred to a study that I have mentioned previously that says persistent contrail conditions are “rare”; I then provided references from studies that narrow down what “rare” means - with numbers - and how the distribution of these conditions is uneven.
I also provided references of previous observation of such weather situations, which obviously did not seem weird to any meteorologist or atmospheric scientist.

It’s your right to continue to insist on your opinion, however it is not evidence for your claim that you have witnessed something evil or even unusual, and that meteorology has got it all wrong.

Persistent and spreading contrails were known and researched at least since 1921; long-lasting contrails and induced cirrus layers are just no evidence for chemtrails or ongoing geo-engineering, despite countless videos and websites claiming exactly that.

By Josh on 2014 11 28 - 09:06:46
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

no one needs to offer up any evidence of anything to josh anonymous. there are countless sources of information available online that him and his dimwitted cohort here ignore, because i guess they dont come from government sources, all the while, hypocritically telling us how untrustworthy the government is.

if fenton and my self declared internet arbiter of all things truthy wish to tell us that there is no such thing as geoengineering, no plans to own the weather, no such thing as chemtrails, then it is up to you failtards to provide the proof to show that what you are saying is true.

if it was true, there would be an abundance of proof. as it is, you have provided nothing. what part of shut the fuck up is too complicated for you to understand shitstain?

By Andrew Adams on 2014 11 25 - 12:02:56
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

Cris,

if the trails look like contrails, why should they not be contrails?

Western Queensland is clearly a “jet traffic area”.
Did you follow the links to Flightradar24? There is the evidence you seek.

All the traffic between Shanghai, Beijing in the North-West and Sydney in the Sout-East is going over it, as well as the Brisbane - Singapore route. Among the traffic are many cargo flights which shouldn’t come as a surprise. Then add all those continental connections.

Speaking of evidence: can you provide an original reference where officials or scientists in charge admit that there is ongoing deliberate geoegineering?
All I have seen so far are discussions about the possibilities and the dangers.

I don’t really see where the metals you list are coming into play. Are you referring to water or blood tests on the ground?
If so, then please provide a direct reference to an actual test result. You may be surprised how few you will find. Anyway, just pick one.

As far as I know, nobody has found those metals in contrail samples yet.

Regarding vitamin D deficiency: this article discusses it concisely. Quote:

Even in winter, UVA rays can penetrate cloud cover and rainfall to hit skin

Last remark: I point out missing evidence. How is that censorship?

By Josh on 2014 11 23 - 20:25:19
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

Josh
I recommend that you supply plausible evidence that 100 or so trails I saw in on day in my non jet traffic area are all condensation trails.
How many flights can there be?
At times between 3 and 8 in less than 5 minutes?
Geoengineeering has been admitted, at least regarding the so called sunscreening with Barium, Aluminium and Strontium.
Perhaps you can google the necessity for UV?
Perhaps the dangers of Barium to the endocrine system, the soil food web, sodium/potassium pump?
Atrification of the pineal gland with aluminium?
Aluminium toxicity in the soil?
Monsatos’ GM gene that can help a plant survive that toxicity?
The role of UV in patogen cleansing? 
And in the production of D vitamins?
The melatonin/seratonin cycle?
Does any of that get past your censorship?

By Cris on 2014 11 22 - 10:39:13
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

Cris,

I recommend to look at this website very critically. There is no explanation about methodology, staff or even what the point is to report “longwave activity”. It can’t be referring to HAARP which had used very short waves to interact with the ionosphere.

On the other hand I found some information about the site owner Kevin Martin. Quite some guy. Read his various forum postings referenced on that page ...

Last but not least: HAARP is inactive since summer 2013 and is currently being dismantled because nobody wanted to pay for its annual bills anymore. Local politicians tried to slow the process.

By Josh on 2014 11 22 - 09:32:48
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

http://www.haarpstatusnetwork.com/2014/11/20/haarp-attack-proof-of-usa-snowstorm-and-arctic-air-attack-planned/

By Cris on 2014 11 22 - 08:50:43
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

Cris,

this pilot’s publications were discussed here before. See the first page of comments, below the question from Christine Haynes.

See also Qantas pilot Michael Glynn’s comments when the discussion about “bluenomore” continued on page 11 (close to the bottom),

By Josh on 2014 11 22 - 01:50:22
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

http://www.bluenomore.com/
This bloke is a pilot.

By Cris on 2014 11 20 - 20:08:50
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

“Yes, that’s water vapour from the jet fuel combustion, meeting ice-cold and humid outside air, freezing almost instantly and providing condensation surface for the humidity already present. The ice crystals are blown apart by strong winds and voilà: there is your contrail-induced cirrus cover.

Again - this has been observed and researched many times.”

wow. you can describe the weather conditions for 5 days in a row in my area without even knowing where i am. remarjable. another example of how you dont think before you write.

this is why i dont care for your imbecilic unqualified anonymous opinion.
what part of shut the fuck up do you have trouble understanding?

By Andrew Adams on 2014 11 20 - 10:50:48
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.

Categories