I will no longer fly as our invasive government continues to play god. I will fly out of Mexico or Canada if I plan to go overseas. US airlines are a pain in the neck anyway and with the government handling security I would rather have a tooth pulled. They use to have us take off our shoes, why not just have us all strip naked and walk before the government inspectors, at least it would save the cost of the machine. These are the same people that caused the collapse of our economy.

Posted By Steve Sanderson on April 9, 2009, 11:33 AM

I will do everything I can NOT to fly. Period. This is a tremendous invasion of privacy! I am appalled, embarrassed, and completely disgusted with what is happening to us "for our own good". Hear this loud and clear airlines.

Posted By tph on April 9, 2009, 11:43 AM

I don't care about invasion of privacy. If it makes flying safer I'm 100% for it. Only a terrorist would be bothered by this.

Posted By Ken Kron on April 9, 2009, 11:43 AM

Outrageous! A horrible invasion of privacy! US citizens should be able to travel in their own country without giving up their basic freedoms!

Posted By Michael V. on April 9, 2009, 12:13 PM

Besides the obvious invasion of privacy and free peep show provided to TSA employees, what are the physical affects of these scans on the travelers? Will we be told in a few years that there is a cancer risk involved? Or maybe we won't be told, but it will exist nonetheless. At some point we need to accept a certain amount of risk in order to live in a free society. I submit that the risk is worth it.

Posted By Leah W. on April 9, 2009, 12:26 PM

I agree with Ken, why should you be bothered by it if it insures your safety. I'd rather be safe when I'm flying with my kids than have to worry that there might be some sicko on the same flight with another agenda.
Although it is invasive, maybe that's the price we have to pay to live in a free country that some choose to hate.

Posted By Pam S on April 9, 2009, 12:29 PM

How will this affect people with Pacemakers and Defibrillators? We already have to do a pat-down since using a wand or going through the metal detector can make the medical equipment think the heart is doing something it is not.

Posted By Evan Jackson on April 9, 2009, 12:30 PM

It's ridiculous! And to say that "only a terrorist" would object is absurd. The way to keep the skies safest is not to have airplanes flying at all. At what point do we say "no?" Dental floss, in the right hands, is a deadly weapon. Let's get real, folks. Plus do we really believe that all TSA employees are vigilant and intelligent? I don't think so.

Posted By JCL on April 9, 2009, 12:33 PM

Great, anything to make us safer!!!!!!! If you dont like it take a train.

Posted By andy on April 9, 2009, 12:33 PM

If I feel anything at all, it is pity for the poor TSA agents who have to staff the whole-body scanners. These scans are not what one would call erotic, and certainly not when you realize most people are not Venus or Adonis. We American's are too uptight.

Safe and quick, that is what I want the airport visit to be.

Posted By Douglas Taft on April 9, 2009, 12:42 PM

What happen to our freedom? I guess we should all just line up to get our food rations and get back to the factory until the bell rings...This is rediculous. Other countries are not doing this but they seem to have no issues. Wake up America and fight for your rights!!!

Posted By HP on April 9, 2009, 12:44 PM

Which six airports is the article refering to? How come they have the technology to see us naked and we still get our stuff stolen out of our suitcases by naggage handlers. Why can't the baggage handlers be screened like this when they come and go from work. They are also a threat, terrorists will avoid the security line and just get a job handling our bags at the airport! Easy enough with the lax employee screening.

Posted By Tricia on April 9, 2009, 12:45 PM

One person has stated that this is the price we pay for living in a "free" country. It is really "Free"??? Where is the line??? Are the government going to start denying passengers if they are over weight because of the safety issues that they may not move as fast??? People with bipolar disease, are they not allowed because of the safety issues??? Where is the line??? Think about it. This could be your child, brother, sister, mother, father, etc. Think hard what the macro impact to your daily lives. Fight for your rights.

Posted By HP on April 9, 2009, 12:51 PM

I don’t fly much now because of the hassles and would have to be absolutely desperate to ever fly again when these things show up. What a waste of our money and an invasion of privacy.

Posted By Shannon on April 9, 2009, 1:03 PM

Looks like we have the same Libs here saying this invasion of privacy is ok for our "safety" that libs are against profiling which makes even more sense. As long as the TSA employs low IQ control freaks, and the airlines try to nickel dime us to death our flying days are being suspended. Terrorists must laugh their butts off watching the TSA operate.

Posted By NickP on April 9, 2009, 1:23 PM

Full body scanning every single passenger, every single flight is not making us safer...it is making us slaves to fear. I was shocked at the exposure the scan shows. Next thing you know, there'll be pictures of Brittany's scan-nudes on the internet. I agree about the TSA employees...I don't need anyone looking at my five year old daughter on his scanner.

Posted By creeped out on April 9, 2009, 2:14 PM

Wow! Xray vision, this is really gone too far. I fly a lot for business and I'm absolutely horrified that I'll have to go through one of these scanners to give TSA a free show! This is truly absurd and inconceivable.

Posted By Cinzia on April 9, 2009, 2:29 PM

I've asked this question many times, but no one has sufficiently answered it for me: Where in the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights does it say our civil rights don't apply in airports? You know, little things like probable cause and freedom from unreasonable search and seizure? Is the mere desire to fly on an airplane considered probable cause? All you people who say, "If it makes us safer, I'm OK with it" just don't get it. It DOESN'T make us safer, and it makes us all a little bit less free. And thus we continue our march toward becoming a police state . . .

Posted By Brent on April 9, 2009, 2:34 PM

What are people afraid of... that someone may know that you have human body parts that resemble other same sex human body parts? I think people have to get over their "body image issues" if that is the "fear" your concerned about. A side from the fact that it is an x-ray machine and that in itself may be harmful... it is other wise harmless... if your afraid to go through it find another means of transportation. It's intent is to safe guard against those who are using the airlines with illegal intent - terrorist, smuggling or otherwise.

Posted By DKS on April 9, 2009, 2:44 PM

I flew from SFO to LAX a few weeks ago on Virgin, and one of these scanners was being used. No one told us we'd be fully scanned or what to expect, and when some people asked to change scanners because they didn't feel comfortable with this one, their requests were declined.

This line also took 3x as long as the others, and once I got through the scanner, a security woman insisted on patting me down, in front of everyone, right then and there. Plus, as I exited the scanner, the TSA woman was staring at my naked image on screen, which isn't the worst, but the two men in front of me (you're pulled over to a waiting queue to get patted down) had turned around and were staring at my nakedness, x-ray style. I've got to say, I felt physically and emotionally violated.

This week, when I flew JetBlue to the east coast, I purposely chose a different lane as to avoid this scanner.

Posted By Becca on April 9, 2009, 2:56 PM

Which airports have this equipment? I (and lots of others) will make a point of going by some other route.
It is bad enough to have to take off your hat and coat and shoes and empty your pockets.
And to live without a Swiss army knife to open cans and bottles, cut sandwiches, pick teeth, trim hair, all the things this little knife can do.

Posted By Jean Gosse on April 9, 2009, 2:59 PM

Politics aside, all I can say is that the use of this kind of technology, and the power that comes along with it, goes way beyond what we as citizens should have to endure. If all the metal detectors are to be replaced with these things, I will NEVER EVER set foot on a plane again. Bye-bye Southwest Airlines credit card! And how long before every govt. building replaces their metal detectors with these scanners? I will become a recluse out in the woods somewhere before I give in to this!!! ((Most people don't know what freedom is until they don't have it anymore))

Posted By jen on April 9, 2009, 3:30 PM

So, there I am being signaled forward to go through the new full body X RAY Scanner...The security person, "I gots some good news and gots some bad news"...I said, "What's the good news?" He says "You can get on the plane." I said, "What's the bad news?" He says, "Your prostrate looks enlarged...better have it checked!!!" I have an appointment tomorrow!!!
That's progress!!!!

Posted By Phillip Grauss on April 9, 2009, 4:15 PM

Not only is this an invasion of privacy, what about the health risks. This is an XRAY people. For those of us who travel regularly, the dose of radiation for a total body scan is huge. When do we call it enough, when we all glow or have strange growths because we fly on a regualr basis?? I agree that this does not keep us safer it keeps us further rooted in fear. I don't remember when the last attack was so obviously something is working as is. Stand up and fight for your rights otherwise we will all be required to walk around naked on a daily basis. As for the men who don't this this is a big deal, how would you feel if your daughter googled you and have your total body scan pops up in all your glory?? This is digitally based and I don't hear anything about long term protection about privacy.... what next, will the insurance company be able to deny you coverage because they don't like the way your TSA scan looks?? WAKE UP!!!

Posted By Susa on April 9, 2009, 4:43 PM

Big government is everywhere now, in the sky's, wires, banks, wallets and now our pants. Enough already.

Posted By CR on April 9, 2009, 4:50 PM

Big government is everywhere now, in the sky's, wires, banks, wallets and now our pants. Enough already.

Posted By CR on April 9, 2009, 4:50 PM

This brings a new dimension to "Big Brother is watching." It is horribly invasive. Let us not forget that most tyrants come to power by promising safety and security.

Posted By Gil on April 9, 2009, 4:52 PM

All I can say is I just read an article on the radiation exposure of some medical scanners, and a single usage can be as much as 3 years worth of natural exposure. Not sure if the TSA scanners give off radiation, however we all may be in for a suprise if they do...called an increase in cancer rates.

Posted By Cheryl on April 9, 2009, 4:59 PM

If you still believe terrorists would plan anything involving air travel, you are just contributing to the problem. The very nature of people's fearfulness is what allows these unfortunate violations to our liberties to happen in the first place. Quit being so afraid and stand up for your rights, with your travel dollar or with your voice.

Posted By KC on April 9, 2009, 5:29 PM

We should just bend over and get our body cavities searched as well. Will this "superman" x-ray vision show a weapon hidden internally? Once it can do that, I'll volunteer!

Posted By denise on April 9, 2009, 5:50 PM

I want to have safe travels for all but I also think the medical information potentially revealed by these scanners violates my right to privacy.

Posted By Jill on April 9, 2009, 6:11 PM

Yep, why dont they just have us strip down naked and fly naked....They ask for it let give it to them.....What a perk for the TSA agents!!!! And under laws in some states this could be considered indecent exposure....

Posted By RICH AND JANET CORLEY on April 9, 2009, 6:24 PM

Please, only a TERRORIST would be bothered by this? I'm in law enforcement and I'm offended by this! - - But, posting your complaints here is pretty much a useless waste of time. Call and write the airlines and TSA and voice your outrage. That's the only way to effect change.

Posted By Logan on April 9, 2009, 6:28 PM

Anyone who really believes that this will make you safer when you fly please bend over. I have a butt probe for you just in case the machine missed something. I guess you'll let TSA do that too since you'll agree to anything as long as "someone" claims it will keep you safe. Really people.
You'll be cool with it until you hear some crude remark made about your sister, mom, wife or daughter.
Other than that, is there any research into how much radiation we are being exposed to everytime we enter this thing? What about cancer patients who have already endured radiation. How much is too much?
I would go on but why bother, the sheep will follow and the naive will stick their heads in the sand and believe that we are "safe". We were just too arrogant to think that this country could be the victims of terrorists and now people are just running scared.

Posted By Sally on April 9, 2009, 6:40 PM

I have had two knee replacements. Everytime I travel through the airport I am detained, wanded, and patted down. I don't think the x-ray machine is any worse.

Posted By Janice Slough on April 9, 2009, 6:41 PM

Has anyone bothered to check and see if it is safe for pregnant women and babies? I would love to see the research. If there is no alternative would a mother have to decide between protecting her child and taking the flight?
I'm guessing child trumps travel so has anyone from the airlines even thought about this in terms of lost revenue.

Posted By Sally on April 9, 2009, 6:51 PM

Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759
US author, diplomat, inventor, physicist, politician, & printer (1706 - 1790)

Posted By Ferrell on April 9, 2009, 6:52 PM

This would be an absolute violation of my privacy. Why should anyone, especially a stranger, be allowed to view me so intimately. It borders on voyourism.

Posted By Betty Acosta on April 9, 2009, 6:59 PM

This would be an absolute invasion of my privacy, and borders on voyourism. Why should anyone, especially a stranger, be allowed to view my body so intimately?

Posted By Betty Acosta on April 9, 2009, 7:02 PM

This of course is completely demeaning - how can we even be discussing this? Problem is, if they cancel it and there is another attack, they'll say "see? we told you you need it!" If they don't cancel it and there is still another attack, "see? you need even more - let's put it on trains - let's put it on tolls!" If nothing happens, you will occasionally (maybe) be told that many attacks have been averted (with no details given of course, for security reasons). Of course you have to believe this. I mean it's a free country (this is an axiom), so every single person working for your security is totally honest and good-willing (corollary follows effortlessly from axiom). It's simply a lose-lose for the average traveller. The fact that the constitution grants you rights is irrelevant. Are you ready to sue? Are you ready to be refused boarding? How exactly will you travel overseas? Hey, you're stuck with it! Now enjoy your next 4th of July fireworks! And don't worry about voting for the other party in the next elections. Security is one.

Posted By Pana on April 9, 2009, 7:05 PM

Safer, really? Anyone who thinks this is safer should take a short course on physical chemistry and genetics. People with children should be particularly cautious about subjecting their growing bodies to this sort of imaging. If you want to know whether the government is concerned about the effects, check to see if they allow pregnant women to be scanned.

Posted By Dominic on April 9, 2009, 7:13 PM

"Hello, I'm from the government and I'm here to
help you.........".
The Patriot Act should never have been rushed
into law !!
Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Ashcroft, etc. Yech.

Posted By matt on April 9, 2009, 7:15 PM

I can understand the concern over invasion of privacy and the right of people tu select an anternte transportation mode or another airport; but reality is that when we fly we need the maximun security posible and available. So what can we do with the scaner: a)make sure that it dose not harm our body, b)make sure that only train and license Health personnel(Doctors, Radiology technitians) by the state in wich the airpor is going to use the equipment will operate the device, c)the dispocition of the images should be regulated by law and with severe panalties if violate. As we can see and live, tecnology can not be stop (and should never be either) but it must be regulated always.

Posted By Carlos on April 9, 2009, 7:17 PM

For those of you, like me, who feel this is an extreme violation of privacy and decency, it is very vital that you voice your concerns with the Department of Homeland Security/TSA and with your elected officials in Washington. I have policy making experience and live in DC and this is how it works. If we do not speak up, more machines will be put into place and it will be too difficult and too late to get them removed.

For those of you arguing that these nude images are an acceptable price to pay to live safely in a "free country," keep in mind that privacy is a cornerstone of freedom. To abandon our core values in this way in response to terrorists is to hand them a major victory.

Posted By Kristi on April 9, 2009, 7:18 PM

The probable cause issue is very alarming but a bigger concern is radiation exposure to
1)flight crews
2)job related frequent flyers
3)infants and small children
4)airport workers
5)TSA staff working the scanners
One would think that OSHA,the CDC,and medical radiation experts would have some concerns.

Posted By Rosie on April 9, 2009, 7:24 PM

Sounds fine with me. I'm not really THRILLED about the idea -- I doubt anyone is -- but if it makes my trip to the airport easier and faster and SAFER, then so be it. If you don't like it, don't fly -- more room for the rest of us.

Posted By Aaron Maxa on April 9, 2009, 7:37 PM

This wonderful scan was not capable of seeing through tissues in my pockets (!) nor of seeing that a moneybelt had only bills & credit cards in it. And then I had to be patted down anyway because (I guess) of a breast prosthesis. I'm going to refuse these scans in the future, since they'll probably have to pat me down anyway. If the things were as efficient as they say, that's one thing. But if they're so flawed, they're only invasive and do not improve safety one whit.

Posted By jxewel on April 9, 2009, 7:46 PM

So now I am wondering....if they scan you and find a major medical problem, wouldn't they be required by law to get you the proper medical attention? Otherwise, you could argue that there was a scan without a diagnosis, which if that happened at any medical facility, would result in a lawsuit!! If you do have a medical problem, will they give you a copy of the scan to take to your doctor?

Also, the photo of the scan clearly showed male and female genitalia. In any other situation, taking that picture would be some kind of violation, especially without the express written permission of the traveller. If they are taking scans of youth that are 15 or younger, they are breaking child porn laws, and if they were anyone except TSA, would be prosecuted for a felony.

Are TSA workers allowed to have any history of criminal offenses in the past? Who are the TSA workers? For their own safety, their identity is kept secure, but maybe for OUR safety, their names and past job and criminal history made public.

I am supposed to fly to an Asian country in a few weeks with my small child, and now I am thinking twice about this trip!!

Posted By GA Mom of 5 on April 9, 2009, 9:02 PM

These aren't "whole-body scanners" or "whole body imaging machines" -- they're strip-search machines. Let's not use euphemisms for it.

It's an electronic strip-search. It's a violation of the 4th Amendment. Flying on an airplane isn't "probable cause" for an electronic strip search.

Posted By Josh on April 9, 2009, 9:21 PM

Well, so much for indecent exposure being legal! We get enough radiation exposure with x-ray, CT scans, etc. And now this?? I definitely do not like what I see on the exposure shown! I believe women should scan women and men scan men (even though there will be some who prefer their own sex .. and I am not homophobic, just stating a fact! I just don't see how seeings one's privates makes for better security unless there we aren't aware of some form of attack that can be made by using the physical attributes! I believe in great security, but somehow there has to be a sensible limit on how much invasion of privacy is allowed!

Posted By RGValleyGal on April 9, 2009, 9:28 PM

Absolutely NO WAY, NO HOW! Big Brother, anyone? I don't care - this is going too far. I lost a sister and brother-in-law on PA 103 in '88, and I don't EVER want to hear the once-in-a-while tragedies used as an excuse by our government in the "name of safety". Hubby and I have traveled to five continents twelve times in 2 1/2 years, and we love it, but I will NEVER agree to this. My sister and her husband wouldn't go for it either.

Posted By Martha on April 9, 2009, 9:30 PM

I'd get naked for my doctor to insure I'm in good health, and I have no problem being scanned to insure everyone against terrorism. It's not like they are photographing and exploiting what they see.

Posted By Joan on April 9, 2009, 9:43 PM

For everyone talking about civil rights violations and claiming they will never fly again - just stop. You sound naive and silly. Those of us who fly every week because our jobs require it - whether to see clients, close deals, visit other locations, market our services - will have no issue with this because it is quicker and safer. We stopped thinking about the 'hassles' of TSA a looong time ago - they are what they are. And we know that airlines won't shut down en masse just because people such as the commenters that claim they are "done flying" don't show up anymore - guess what, your supersaver ticket to Vegas or Little Rock wasn't the revenue keeping the airlines afloat to begin with. Airline travel is an option and a remarkable convenience - not a civil right. If you don't want to get screened by these machines, then please - don't fly. We won't miss you getting in the way at security anymore. And if you actually think that the TSA folks would actually be enjoying looking at your see-through image - please, take a look in the mirror next time you get out of the shower. Go worry about something else - these machines are inevitable.

Posted By K-D on April 9, 2009, 10:47 PM

Amazing that you people get ur panties in a bunch over something like this. I will parade around naked if it saves one person from being killed by a terrorist. Honestly, who cares? If your not doing anythign wrong why are u all so aggravated..I dont get it. and u call these tsa people pervs for screening the pics? give me a break, the pics are so generic its ridiculous. Get it together people and lets give a little thanks for the country we live in. It could be ALOT worse....take a good look around at some other places.

Posted By Freedom on April 9, 2009, 11:07 PM

Does anyone really feel safe with TSA? These morons are one step away from working for minimal wage at the local convenience store. Seriously, these are not the sharpest tools in the shed.

Posted By RH on April 9, 2009, 11:09 PM

This is a link to the TSA website which addresses the body scanners they're using: http://www.tsa.gov/approach/tech/body_imaging.shtm
It'll tell you where the scanners have been installed and TSA's policy on how they should be operated and how the images should be handled (particularly important for those who might need to complain to TSA about other passengers and random TSA agents being able to ogle their scans).

For those with health concerns, note at the bottom of the page two links to sites which describe how the scanners work as well as the risks inherent in their use. I would double-check the content of these particular sites with another scientific source.

Posted By e.d. on April 9, 2009, 11:17 PM

I am married to a security expert who says someone who seriously wants to cause harm in an airplane would not bother with boarding the plane as a passenger, but would target the cargo area. Baggage handling security is far more lax and easier to get around. These scanning machines are a waste of money as well as a violation of our civil rights. In other words, you are giving up your privacy for nothing in return.

Posted By jmh on April 9, 2009, 11:19 PM

Even if it did make us safer, I wouldn't put up with it. If they offered flights that didn't require any security screens and you agreed to take your chances with the bombs, I would choose the "bomb flights" every time. If the distance to my destination is not more than Salt Lake to Las Vegas, I drive, and I'm halfway there in the time it requires to arrive early at the airport. Plus, the baggage handlers steal stuff out of your bags; make them walk through the scanners when their shift is over.

Posted By Donald Gunderson on April 9, 2009, 11:45 PM

I think that is absolutely absurd! It is all a joke this frisking at the airports, and it does not make us any safer. The government wants the public to think it makes us more safe but it is a total waste of money and time. We will not fly unless it is an emergency and already made plans to travel by car or motor home. We will not participate in Big Brother schemes. This is just getting out of hand, more like socialism to us.

Posted By sedina on April 9, 2009, 11:55 PM

As a first line of defense, why aren't the people in charge focusing on the unscanned cargo that travels on all of our airplanes??????

I was subjected to this gross invasion recently in the Tulsa airport. While they were having me turn this way and that to look at all my private parts, my personal property, laptop, etc., had already gone through the scanners and was sitting there unattended and unwatched for anyone to pick up and carry off. I felt I was doubly violated. I was caught unprepared when asked to step into the scanner booth, and was unbelievably outraged, but didn't want to miss my flight. What are we to do?

I agree that the luggage handlers should be the first to be scanned as they leave work.

Posted By Carol on April 10, 2009, 1:02 AM

Get over it people. For those saying it's a free peep show for the TSA, I doubt it's much of a show with most of us. Would you prefer to die because someone with plastic explosives that were not detected in the metal detector got on your airplane and blew it up? Don't tell me that it can't happen because it never has, that's the thinking that caused us to be complacent enough to the type of attack that happened on 9/11. I say never again, and if it takes a body scanner to prevent it then so be it.

Posted By Ed Zapata on April 10, 2009, 1:19 AM

I'm all for safety but this is just ridiculous! no matter if you're built like a supermodel or 400 lbs, I'm sure no one cares to have their bodies practically bare naked in front of the TSA employees & whomever else happens to be in viewing range of the screen. I don't care to be subjected to any additional radiation & I certainly don't care to be subjected to the leers of perverts getting their rocks off on something like this (and that's to say nothing of the people traveling with their children, whether young or older.) if it is to be used, there has to be a way to limit the strength of what it reveals as well as limiting who can view it. bad form TSA!

Posted By jaymzangel on April 10, 2009, 1:43 AM

An invasion of privacy? Only if you have something to hide.

Posted By Jim on April 10, 2009, 1:57 AM

I say "Go for it"! The more security the better. I'm not THAT ashamed of the body God gave me that I should hide it in the face of antiterrorist shennanigans! I'm also FOR traffic cameras because who cares if they watch if you're not doing anything wrong! The same goes for other surveillance tactics! If you've got nothing to hide, who cares if people keep a watch over you to protect you!

Posted By John Williams on April 10, 2009, 2:51 AM

Yes that is getting unreal. but what is worse ? is having to look at the scanner, have you seen some of the people walking around , now think about having to look at them with no clothes.sicking thought. know one should have to do this job ,band it ,stop it now. theres enough poeple taking there on life as it is.yuk, RGB

Posted By ronald ball on April 10, 2009, 4:28 AM

and why are we all getting uptight because a stranger we will never see again sees an outline of our bodies? Will that fact really change anything in one's future? I imagine the employees that see these scans because numb rather than aroused after seeing outlines of thousands of imperfect bodies a day. They can turn on any american nighttime tv and get a better show. Aren't we americans a little prudish when the whole idea is safety? Much of the clothing that is worn today shows nearly as much as the machine will show and those people don't seem to feel like their privacy is invaded. We need to stop with the prudishness and just enjoy the higher technology that adds to our safety. A slight bit of "nudity" is certainly more preferable than a terrorist event.

Posted By sarah ponton on April 10, 2009, 6:35 AM

this is a waste of time and money....what is in place will work if used right. I would say this is to much....over the line and yes I am an american I also think enough is enough

Posted By bill on April 10, 2009, 8:45 AM

When I was a child, I loved to go to the shoe store and look at my feet in the fluoroscope machine. I could see the both the outline of my foot within my shoe and the bones of my foot. Today, you cannot find a floriscope anywhere, except perhaps a museum, because they were found to be a source of radiation, and in the human body, radiation causes cancer. If I go to the doctor or dentist and have an x-ray taken, the person taking the x-ray steps behind a lead shield so they are not exposed to radiation. I go through airport check points a great many more times than I have x-rays, and I wonder if the whole body scanner is also exposing me to radiation in the same way an x-ray or the old fluoroscope?
As for having our privacy invaded. Flying commercially is a privilege, not a right. If we chose to fly commercially, we have a responsibility to ourselves and others who are flying to cooperate with any security measure. Everyone should be able to fly commercially with the knowledge that those who provide us with this service have done all they possibly could to insure that we are safe, and that everyone will arrive at their destination unharmed. If this means special security measures, then I have no objections. If I do object, then I can choose either not to fly, or to fly privately. So, if the fluoroscope is safe I have no objections.
Isn't it a shame that our society reached the point where we must all fear for our safety while carrying on ordinary, everyday activities?

Posted By CPG3 on April 10, 2009, 8:50 AM

Let it happen. Safety first. If a person is to modest to let a screening agent view their full body X-ray for a few seconds and then move on to the next image, they are too conceited. For the most part the agent probably does not physically see the person or could care less after viewing thousands of scans. Get over it .

Posted By Tim on April 10, 2009, 9:44 AM

I'm not a terrorist, and I'm offended by it. You should be offended, too. You don't want to see my body nekkid! 8~O

Posted By ejf on April 10, 2009, 9:56 AM

No to whole body scanners! Go to tsa.gov and post your complaint! Write an email to or call up your congressperson. "Unless there's an uproar" we might as well go naked to the airport. (EWWW!!)

Posted By VS on April 10, 2009, 10:03 AM

Just went through the "whole body" in Albuquerque and it is S-L-O-W. Took us about twice as long as the other lines that were using the usual system. It was very frustrating. Why is it necessary and how much will it cost?

Posted By C.K. Martin on April 10, 2009, 11:00 AM

Yet another chipping away of our civil rights and our protections under the 4th Amendment of the Constitution. Every mandatory search takes away from the legal premise of "innocent until proven guilty", which has guided the United States since its inception. The TSA is founded on the premise that everyone is guilty of being a terrorist, and has to prove their innocence.

All those who are saying "Let it happen" and "If you don't have anything to hide, why are you complaining?", allow me to remind you of the words of Pastor Martin Niemoller:

"In Germany, they came first for the Communists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist;
And then they came for the trade unionists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist;
And then they came for the Jews, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew;
And then . . . they came for me . . . And by that time there was no one left to speak up."

How many rights are you willing to sacrifice in the name of security? For me, the answer is: none.

Posted By JMThane on April 10, 2009, 11:11 AM

It was only a matter of time before technology would be able to create an "xray" machine (it really is a machine that throws millimeter waves at you like a radio and the transmission is 10,000 times less dangerous than a cellphone transmission). The future has arrived...soon we won't have to even put our bags on conveyor belts, we can just walk through with them and the computer program that is used will be able to dectect object shapes, materials etc so that it can tell whether or not your carrying a metal knife or metal spoon (just an example)... BTW it is interesting that the movie Total Recall with Arnold Schwarzenegger has an airport scene where this same technology is implemented.

Posted By Amanda on April 10, 2009, 11:21 AM

This is an invasion of my privacy. I don't want random people look at me naked. What if the TSA agents are pedophiles (that have not been caught) or other sick people like that? Why not get the dogs that sniff out bombs and drugs into the airports at the security lines? That would be much cheaper and more of a friendlier way of checking these things, and then go thru the basic scanners that they have in place now. That way you are check twice and flying would be much safer and not so violating. Those xray pictures that are listed are too graphic for anyone to see, much less sending small children threw. This is an evasion of my privacy.

Posted By Missy on April 10, 2009, 12:10 PM

I was offered the opportunity to use a body scanner instead of metal detector recently. I declined not because I care who sees my semi-naked image, and not because millimeter wave (bounces off the skin, not going to cause lung cancer; reasonable to ask what repeated exposure does to skin cancer risks) X-ray frightens me, but for the reason that only one posted above stated:

These are not more time-efficient.

You have to remove everything from your pockets, including boarding passes, passports, tissues, handkerchiefs, pens - everything.

I don't let my passport out of my personal control. And I pre-load my pants and shirt pockets with a variety of useful items which are no impediment to metal detectors and the security people who operate them and see me through every time.

So for me, as I suspect for most frequent travelers who are well outfitted for efficiency in our many passages through airports foreign and domestic, these machines requiring us to take off everything but a single layer of clothing makes them slower than the old metal detector route.

Posted By Jay Libove, CISSP, CIPP on April 10, 2009, 1:11 PM

Hey, all you folks that are "embarrassed" to be scanned. Don't EVER go to the beach anymore! People might SEE you. Big deal, as far as I can see, only men are going to be showing very much and I, for one couldn't care less if someone wants to see a fuzzy image of me. Let it ALL hang out. It may even inspire some to shed a few pounds to look a little more "buff". Pun intended.

Posted By Jimbo on April 10, 2009, 1:12 PM

scanners .... x-rays? radiation risks? to say nothing of total invasion of one's privacy. My spouse cannot get information related to my pacemaker and medical status but the contract employees for TSA can have complete information to my body! What a freedom are we really protecting?

Posted By millie on April 10, 2009, 2:20 PM

Get a life. If you want to travel as safe as possible then accept. If we were truly a civilized society it would not be necessary.

Posted By Bob Fredericks on April 10, 2009, 2:37 PM

Yes, we all agree that security is essential. But so are brains and I'd like TSA to apply some to this situation. You DO realize that the next logical step to the 'do anything to ensure safety' thinking is having us all bend over. After all, this doesn't show what may or may not be inside. Worse, this IS a huge health risk.

Posted By Cynthia on April 10, 2009, 4:00 PM

You may scan me and my children anytime. We have nothing to hide. If it protects my family then do it! These are not sexy pictures. I am a nurse. Do you think I get turned on by all the butts I see from giving shots? Of course not. If people don't like the rules of the good ole USA, then leave. See how much freedom and welfare you will have in other countries where people are starving and ruled by dictators. Go!

Posted By HK on April 10, 2009, 6:56 PM

ANYONE WHO GIVES UP THERE FREEDOM FOR SECURITY DESERVES NEITHER. EVERY DAY THE GOVERNMENT CHIPS AWAY AT OUR FREEDOMS AND AMERICANS ARE FOOLS TO JUST SIT BY AND LET IT HAPPEN. THEY BAIL OUT THE BANKS THEN THEY REPORT RECORD PROFITS, YOUR NEW CAR WARRANTY IS GUARANTEED BY THE GOVERNMENT NOT THE COMPANY. THROW THE CONSTITUTION AWAY, BURN IT, IT'S A USELESS PIECE OF PAPER--- UNLESS YOU STAND UP FOR YOUR RIGHTS. YOUR ANCESTORS AND THE VETERAN CEMETERY'S ARE FULL OF PEOPLE WHO ARE ASHAMED OF YOU.

Posted By cowboy on April 10, 2009, 11:02 PM

Only a terrorist would be bothered by this? If it makes it safer to fly? Like it was that unsafe to begin with? Our founding fathers are ROLLING OVER IN THEIR GRAVES right now. This type of invasion is the reason they wrote the Bill of Rights and the Constitution. Blood was shed and hundreds of thousands of lives lost to protect our right to not have to endure such b.s.

Posted By Shannon on April 11, 2009, 12:12 AM

The privacy issue is not a big deal - after all, people get naked for medical exams and as long as they think the purpose is beneficial they comply with little complaint (plus as the nurse said, the images aren't particularly sexy anyway). The unknown potential for damage to the body by the scans is of much greater concern = promoting cancer is definitely a possibility.

Posted By Joe on April 11, 2009, 12:32 AM

The fact that whole body scanners are intrusive is not nearly as bad as the fact that they are dangerous. Many of us have had medical procedures that make X-Rays of this nature prohibitive. When I think about some of the other dumb things this government is doing, I wonder if anyone in the appropriate capacity bothered to investigate the health aspect. HK stated that if we did not like the rules of the good ole USA, then we should leave. Let me ask you: are you really willing to subject your body to harm just because someone tells you to? Let me remind you, that one of the good things about this country is that we do not have to roll over and play dead every time someone tells you to do something you know is not right. That means I don't have to go through a dangerous whole body scanner just because TSA wants me to do so; my doctor says "No" and I believe him.

Posted By NB on April 11, 2009, 1:38 AM

PEOPLE!!!! These are not fuzzy images - you can clearly see the size and shape of breasts, the length of a penis, the shape of the testicle region - i do not mean to be crude - but these are very graphic photos. Think of walking through this machine, and waiting for your daughter to be scanned while all the people in line are watching the scanner. The other people in line do not need to be "perverts" - but they do not have a right to see my child naked. EVER.

Posted By KM on April 11, 2009, 1:59 AM

Please do not let your personal issues with our body image interfere with safety. There are some sick folks out there who would not think twice about killing your children, your family and your neighbors. I am not too crazy about showing my 56 year old body to anyone, but if it saved ONE live I would get naked in front of a packed stadium crowd.

Posted By Forn on April 11, 2009, 9:25 AM

There comes a point when the measures put in place to secure our freedoms actually limit our freedoms. I think the TSA measures to attempt some kind of improved security on US flights have reached the point of being counterproductive. I believe they are actually inhibiting the general freedoms of all US Citizens in an attempt to weed out the extreme minority of suspected terrorist passegers (without upsetting anyone over racial profiling, of course). I agree with Leah W. that living free has some inherent risks, and I would rather just take the risks and enjoy the freedom to move about the country without all the hassle. I am not afraid to take on a terrorist myself on the plane if he/she is stupid enough to attempt something... If every American felt the same way, we wouldn't need the government invading our privacy with these scanners in some vain attempt to "protect and serve" via the x-ray peep show.

Posted By Rick W. on April 11, 2009, 10:49 AM

Maybe a couple of these commenters who poo-pooh those of us who feel embarrased about our bods being "put out there", maybe they are some of those guys who LOVE to put themselves on display, maybe own a couple of trench-coats, guys? Some trousers cut off at the knees with elastic around the tops-hmmm??? Couple of local cops on a first-name basis with you-all-Hmmm?? IndyMo

Posted By IndyMo on April 11, 2009, 1:20 PM

I fail to see where this is a violation of your right to privacy. How about my right to take a plane and not be blown up?
I don't care about this. If you really think some TSA agent is going to get all excited looking at your image for 2 seconds, then you have much bigger issues than you think.

Also, the lack of proper spelling and punctuation leads me to believe that the majority of comments were made by people who have never left their "block".

I am all for anything that ensures I am safely transported from point A to point B with less chance of terrorism.

I think that the US has gone overboard with "rights" and needs to go back to protecting our people.

Posted By LRP on April 11, 2009, 2:24 PM

This is the pinnacle of invasion of our privacy under the guise of "war against terrorism" and sanctioned by the Patriot Act initiated by our ex President George Bush.This has gone too far. I urge our congress to overturn the Parriot Act and let us again show the world that America stands for freedom, dignity, decency and respect for all human beings. I for one will use alternate forms of transportation wherever possible and fly out of Canada.

Posted By Zeeman on April 11, 2009, 2:58 PM

What about the danger to people's health? Do you think we can be scanned repeatedly without affect? On the National Cancer Institute's list of cancer causes: ionizing radiation. From the Electronic Privacy Information Center:
"When being screened, a passenger is scanned by high-energy X-ray beam moving rapidly over her body. "
Who's going to take care of my medical bills if I get cancer? Of course they won't blame these TSA machines. It could be a silent killer for years before serious concerns were raised.
Once again the government is using it's FEARMONGERING (terror! Terrorists! Terror!) and we shriek and give them a handshake for throwing our health and privacy in the garbage.

Posted By Skee3 on April 11, 2009, 10:44 PM

Just think some criminally inclined dropout that works for TSA will be gettin' off on what everybody else has to pay for. for myself, I'm going to opt for the "pat down" cops have been doing it to me for 49 years already, so I'm used to it...Let the TSA person get cancer from x-ray exposure!

Posted By David S. Schneider-Citizen on April 12, 2009, 5:07 PM

The best thing we can do is try to stop this invasion of our privacy, our rights to due process, and the threat to our health that x-rays represent. I think we should all write our congressional reps, senators, and the President. If they want us to contribute to the economy by flying they had better respect us. The Bush Administration did everything it could to suspend the Constitution; it's time we got it back.

Posted By Denise on April 12, 2009, 5:27 PM

If you think this will deter determined well-trained terrorists, it won't!

They will have what ever they need with them in their carry-on and it will be ignored or not noticed by the TSA or it will be already put on the aircraft by a ground staff accomplice.

If you want security do it the way the Israelis do it. But we can't do that here, that would be profiling.

Posted By Dick on April 12, 2009, 6:04 PM

Total body imaging is taking airline safety one step over the line. We need to get a grip and get back to reality. Thinking that an x-ray is going to stop "terrorism" is silly. A true terrorist will find ways other than bombs on planes to kill Americans.

Posted By Beej on April 12, 2009, 6:28 PM

Re: Radiation levels

Several readers have worried about the radiation level of these scanning machines. The TSA says that the x-rays do not penetrate your skin, which is why the images do not reveal the skeleton underneath your skin. The TSA says that the radiation does not exceed the amount of radiation you may get in front of an old cathode ray TV, the typical TV folks used to have in their homes. The L3 Millimeter Wave Whole Body Imager was tested by an independent company for its level of radiation. The report can be viewed as a PDF, here.

Thanks for all of your comments,
Sean
Blog editor

Posted By Blog Editor on April 12, 2009, 6:48 PM

The machine is a ridiculous overreach of government. The body scanner won't stop anyone fully committed to harming an aircraft, and the rest of us will be left literally exposed to the whims and questionable character of random and - if reports are true, questionably trained - security personnel. Remember the book '1984', anyone?

Posted By Benicia Briak on April 12, 2009, 7:58 PM

This is a total invasion of privacy. TSA is getting totally out of hand. Going through security is already a pain in the blank!!! America needs to get tougher on the stereotypes causing all these problems getting Thur the airports. Don't punish everybody because of a few.I will stop flying when this happens.

Posted By Ronald Dreibelbis on April 13, 2009, 8:43 AM

TSA is and always will be a joke. I have worked for the former agency and like most federal gov. agencies they are a joke. It is filled with over zealous cowboys who think they are saving the world, but in reality like any security system it is only as strong as it's weakest link. This new scanning imaging should never be used for every day tourist passengers. It is not only an invasion of privacy, but another waste of taxpayer money. All you need is some pervert and they are in any agency to start uploading the images to youtube or some other part of the internet to make fun or money. I was never impressed with this agency as it never even had the proper payroll equiped for new people hired on. Another fact is that the private security screening force was tested more often on the x-ray machines than TSA agents evere were. All of sudden because of panic and a BS presidential tyrant and the Cheney/Bush years we took away all our rights and freedoms and what the US use to stand for. All you will need is some BS manager willing to scan a voluptious womam or a whatever fetish he or she might have and start having fun. NO, no more, ENOUGH. America has had enough. The one thing that should have changed is that the old private screeners should have been given a better wage. That would have been it. As far as training it was a joke. Pilots, airline pilots did the classroom training for TSA in the beginning. These are the same guys who wouldn't stop for a second to be screened, because they thought they didn't have to be. You want to know about TSA, TSA had one guy who had a metal plate in his head from gov. disability, who could not be that close to some machines. SEATAC Airport was the worst in the nation too. That is where I was stationed and fired from a new manager cowboy who if he didn't like you, you would get fired. There was too much buddy buddy system with overpaid managers and the usual gov. BS. Anymore I hate to fly. I can't stand it, and if we as a people do not say ENOUGH!!. Then Canada is looking more free than America.

Posted By mikey41 on April 13, 2009, 8:55 AM

I have seen the photographs and can only say that the negative comments previously posted are irrational. These photos to nothing to stimulate the sexual appetite and go a long way to render the object as dangerous or not.

It is far too easy to pass through a metal detector with a plastic (and lethal) knife or other object. Polymer firearms abound and could be be smuggled aboard an aircraft and put together by an accomplice. (And please, save the admonitions that I helping the terrorists by giving them ideas -- these are subjects that the FAA has complained about for years so the terrorists already know these ideas.)

I am the first to scream about the intrusiveness of the government and the slow degradation of our privacy and liberties, but I am also using a rational decision-making process in my support of the total body scanner.

The time savings alone with not having to unload everything on your person and pick your possessions -- along with the 1000 people in front of you -- is enormous.

And medically speaking, when you are looking at people in a professional capacity you really do lose all recognition that this is a member of the opposite sex. It is just another body passing through. And if those images shown are any example, God help the poor fool who gets aroused by those pictures as he or she has bigger issues.

Posted By Jeff Peters on April 13, 2009, 10:30 AM

Airline pilots got paid in the six figures to do the classroom training for TSA personnell in the beginning of TSA. Each one of these machines are what in the 6 figures I am presuming, and then you have people that do not know what they are looking at because of improper training. They have managers a lot middle managers who get paid upwards to the 6 figure mark, they have floor personnell who get paid close to the 35 or so mark, to wand you or whatever. I remember someone who just sat in an office, then was put right into a management position. People wake up, this full body scanner is BS. ENOUGH!!!!

Posted By mikey41 on April 13, 2009, 11:26 AM

You mean to say, {moderators} are as voyeuristic, mashers {peeping toms }, perverted, as the group that dreamt this up. It was not bad enough that foreign government owned and hired most of whom, where doing security, for ports and airport facilities in the U.S. It is way to late to change the damaged, that they deliberately caused. The dead are dead, and any security devices will eventually, be rendered useless, with the help of the same morons, that caused the mad depraved chicken-hawkish; like panic to begin with. All most, all that have commented seem to have a vested interest in, the companies making such; "peeping tom"; like machine [perverts], or just are like to, rudely inconvenience the overall population, in the guise of someone is going to kill!; or someone is going to die!. Well get a clue, we all die, and this is not going to stop any one from killing another. How perverted is the U.S. Government and it's business partners, what new level of depravity are they, trying to achieve?

Posted By sanspade on April 13, 2009, 4:42 PM

This is absurd!! If most of the many holes in our southern border were closed. If there were an established need for this scanner. If those individuals that look like security risks (profiling) were being checked closely. If a dozen other things were being done then maybe, until then DEFINITELY NOT.

Posted By pete on April 13, 2009, 4:49 PM

TSA has gone too far! Yes, we need security but at the same time there is a need to respect people's privacy. The whole body scan image makes me feel naked and very exposed. I don't run around naked every day and I sure don't want to do that at the airport. I am sure there are some TSA workers who don't feel comfortable looking at those images all day long. What a great way to reduce air travel traffic and good and future potential TSA workers!!!

Posted By jean on April 14, 2009, 1:06 AM

So you think TSA makes us safer? I forgot to remove my penknife from my coat pocket before leaving for the airport once and buried it in my breifcase. I was able to get it through security and take it on the plane. All this safety stuff is just eyewash. If someone wants to blow up/highjack a plane they will do it.

Posted By paul on April 14, 2009, 2:59 PM

What about child pornography? I will not stand for my child going through one of these machines and having some twisted TSA pedophile ogling my child and getting their jollies off! Not to mention the amount of radiation we are receiving. Ever wonder why the X-Ray tech has you wear a lead jacket and then they leave the room when you get an X-Ray?

It's legal child porn and unregulated radiation exposure.

Posted By Greg on April 19, 2009, 12:18 PM

I think its funny. Here in the US, we spend all of this time saying "Oh, I have a right to this.. it's my inalienable right to have that.. don't take my right of this.. don't take my right of that."

Yet.. we're the same people that yell:

"WHOA! Don't privatize portions of our healthcare system.. figure out where we're supposed to go to choose a policy? we're too stupid to deal with it on our own.. we LOVE our government controlling it if it means its not going to cost us much. Besides, even if we -did- manage it and lost all of the money in the process, we'd sue our government back to get it."

or

"I just bought a house I totally cant afford, cause I was a greedy dumb person, I actually -FELL- for the part where someone said 0% Mortgages were a good thing.. now i'm upside down on my Mortgage and i'm going to lose my house. HELP ME GOVERNMENT"

or

"Theres a kid that just walked into a school and blew stuff up.. and it was there, plain as day in the internet!!!! Everyone on the internet KNEW it was going to happen! And with GUNS, too! In this day and age, why couldnt the cops just scan the internet and just stop it right before it happened.. HELP US GOVERNMENT"

or

"OMG.. look.. 9/11 just happened.. and our Government KNEW ABOUT IT.. LONG TIME BEFORE IT HAPPENED.. OMG.. WHY didn't they just go and get everyone.. just start digging and digging, and just arrested the whole lot of (whatever nationlity you think was responsible.. because let's face it.. you probably dont know the identies or nationalities of any of the hijackers. Matter of fact, you probably couldnt point out where Nebraska was on a map, let alone Saudi Arabia, or Jordan)"

OR

"Yeah.. I wouldnt EVER sign up for the military. Jeesh! Why would I ever do that? Let them just go try and recruit all of the dumb kids - being in the service and serving our country just isn't something i want to do.. though I love having Memorial day weekend off.. well.. to celebrate all of those cookouts and parties in my driveway.. wait.. there's a parade? What of?... "

It's ALWAYS someone else's problem.. until someone wants to see you naked, or someone wants to step into your backyard. As soon as THAT happens, WHOA well its time to take the American flag out of the closet (Cause let's face it.. you're usually too lazy to take it up and put it down since you ceremoniously bought it post 9-11) and raise it really really high.. cause you're being repressed.

God forbid we actually take a moment and actually realize that maybe in some instances, the U.S isn't really about US, and more about all of it's citizens collectively.

That would mean, that yeah.. sometimes, someone in front of a computer may have to see a poorly digitized version of your weenie.. but let you bring your Pepsi across the security screening.

Because drinking a soft drink at 7am, is just your right...

Posted By RC on April 25, 2009, 8:16 PM

"Those who give up their liberty for more security neither deserve liberty nor security." Benjamin Franklin.

Have we come so far that we have forgotten our roots? This is completely invasive and just wrong! What about those who have to fly?

Posted By Paula Bentley on April 27, 2009, 7:57 AM

Yes I do believe our country is going the wrong way with these so called security measure. For some reason our government wants us to believe that because we are inconvienced and forced to waste time standing in line and sitting around in airports that we are somehow safe. Truth is we probably aren't. Now we have to have our privacey violated along with the other inconviences of "security". I am sure this latest idea will mean travelers have to arrive 3 hours before their flights so the high school drop out running the machine will have more time to flirt with the girl who works at the rape artist known as Starbucks while she is on break. I think the TSA must have gotten a good price on these scanners from the former Soviet Union.....since that seems to be where we are heading.

Posted By Heath Williams on April 29, 2009, 8:03 AM

For all you people out there that says "they are all for it, for the sake of safety". If the government says terrorist are hiding bombs in body, are you prepared for a body cavity search? After all, you have said as long as it makes flying safer.

Posted By J Smith on April 30, 2009, 3:34 PM

Technology has not kept you safe; more techonology will not make you safer.

Posted By Reginald Daniel on May 1, 2009, 12:01 AM

I am seriously concerned about the radiation exposure for those of us who fly often. Just like the radiation to the thymus, considered totally safe at the time, which was done on babies in the 1940's, which many years later was found to cause thyroid cancer, this too could end up being a public health nightmare! And then what recourse will we all have?

Posted By Nancy on May 4, 2009, 6:48 PM

We are done flying if the TSA computer generated strip search is the only way to fly. I am shocked at how many people are nothing more than sheeple--w/no regard for basic human dignity and putting aside the rights we have enjoyed in this country...for another false sense of security. How about the "gel" fill of a depends undergarment? A menstrual pad? The horror of a child going through puberty when they realize their parent allowed them to be ogled by strangers who may have also captured their nude pictures to enjoy later (like that could NEVER happen)??

And to those who think they'll be so happy when those of us w/dignity aren't flying...we're the kind of people who would get up and stop a terrorist who threatened a plane load of passengers--while you pantywaists who are so lulled into a false sense of security by the virtual strip search would probably throw up your hands and say, "Oh well! Golly, gee--I let the TSA have their way w/me, might as well sit here and let the terrorists do the same."

Enough is enough already.

Posted By Stacey on May 6, 2009, 6:20 PM

Oh my God, I needed to see what you have shown me to really understand. In the name of security this is really a total invasion. When did we become so complacent, frightened little creatures to allow something like this to be done to us. You can only die once and we are all going to do it. Let me go down with some dignity please. I have yet to pose for nude photos for big money so I surely won't do it for free!!!

Posted By Phyllis Kenton Brown on May 8, 2009, 3:41 PM

This concept is flawed. In order to increase safety, security personnel does not need to see more, but rather, see more accurately. Using existing technology, security personnel miss a fair amount of contraband. Looking at the passenger's body versus looking at the passenger's carry-on luggage will not decrease the rate of undiscovered contraband. Considering the number of non-terrorist passengers is far greater than the number of passengers that are terrorists, this idea seems more dazzling than useful. Like applying very expensive cartoon character bandaid when the kid really needs to talk about why he keeps hurting himself.

Posted By Reginald Daniel on May 9, 2009, 12:04 AM

I've read most of the blog entries, until I just got tired of reading all of the negativism. The world has changed and everyone, not just 10%, of flyers should be effectively inspected. The scan is not invasive, relative to a pat down, and I believe privacy is an unwarranted excuse that just doesn't stand up to the threat mitigation of the scan. I would like to see this scan combined with bomb sniffing technology. The rest of the world is not nearly so sensitive to their personal appearance. Besides, and this is the big one, the current inspection techniques are ineffective and can be defeated. If we are going to inspect, then let's do it effectively which also includes much better scrutiny of the carry on baggage.

Posted By John on May 11, 2009, 8:20 PM

okay by me

Posted By melvin mccartney on May 11, 2009, 8:40 PM

Uh....I think you mean Bush! No seriously, I can't believe the scanners and just how revealing they are! Might as well strip. In my experience most TSA have not been terribly sensitive or polite. I hate the idea that this type of creation will be in the hands of insensitive 6th grade maturity level people (no, I realize not everyone...I'm point out the extreme examples we've all experienced).

Posted By lori on May 14, 2009, 3:24 PM

If these scanners are so safe and will not be linked to cancer or radiation exposure then why are they suggesting men cover up their privates? hmmmm. So they can't see them? horse hoey! Why are men's parts so private and female parts less private? They know damn well there is a risk and this is just a cover up for later lawsuits! A pat down never caused cancer!

Posted By ladyw on May 16, 2009, 10:30 AM

What ever happened to the phrase..

People shall not fear the Government, the Government shall fear the people.

Posted By Bob on May 18, 2009, 11:46 PM

I'm appalled! Of course it's an invasion of privacy. If I want to carry a bomb onto a plane, that's MY business, not yours!

Posted By Dan on May 19, 2009, 12:37 PM

First off, this is not X-Ray technology. Whether your pro or against it, please take a second to get the technology straight. The frequency is a bit higher than that of a wireless network. It is a Millimeter wave technology, opposed to nanometer (X Ray). I think the idea of safety is a good one, however when implemented by people is when problems come in. I would be more uncomfortable with someone touching me than someone leering at me, but that's personal preference. If the technology could be implemented with no human interaction/interference/whatever, ie scanned by imaging software for "dangerous" items, when nothing found image purged and person good to go then I would feel better about it. I think I'd still feel like I should get paid to walk through it though...

Posted By ChrisG on May 19, 2009, 2:59 PM

I am a man with a small penis. I would be humiliated by a picture of my penis to be made public, even to an audience of one, and even if my face is blurred. I do not want to be the TSA joke of the day.

The real security threats are the workers on the tarmac who are screened very little and an insecure southern border anybody can walk through.

If these pictures are just nothing, why don't all of those working in the TSA Administrator's office post their images on the internet (with their faces blurred) for everyone to see.

Posted By Anon Man on May 19, 2009, 3:56 PM

There are claims that these images will be secure. What is there to stop TSA personnel from using a camera-phone from recording the image?

Don't tell me there is a rule against it. There are rules against cameras in locker rooms and those pictures are all over the internet.

Even if a person's actual image is not available, what is to stop TSA personnel from using a substitute image to blackmail someone?

Posted By Anon Man on May 19, 2009, 4:00 PM

Everybody is offended by everything! We are a nation of crybabies. Why should anyone care if another person sees the image? So some faceless drone sees you naked in grayscale. So what? Apparently, people would rather have an increased chance of death by crash.

Posted By REM on May 19, 2009, 5:32 PM

I am not a terrorist and I am appalled by this new scanner, which is demeaning, invasive and illegal. If it works so well, why do we still have to remove our SHOES! We should be given a choice to be individually hand scanned, but we are not given any choice-just line up, be exposed, and be cheery and thankful about it. NO WAY! This will go the supreme court and it should.

Posted By Deborah Rael-Buckley on May 19, 2009, 7:47 PM

Flying is optional and honestly it takes away from so many of the annoying things we have to do in the airport (apparently with the exception of removing shoes).

They blur out the faces of the person getting scanned, only one attendant sees the scanner and they cannot see the person. Really wouldn't you rather this this? It seems innovative in terms of airport security.

Posted By Jess on May 20, 2009, 2:30 PM

If this is such a "no big deal" issue, why did Germany ask the EU to ban whole body imaging? Most Europeans are far more comfortable with seeing images of unclothed people than are U.S. citizens, yet there is just as much discomfort about this scanner in Germany as there is here.

Posted By Nancy on May 21, 2009, 9:47 AM

As a Security Expert, I can say these methods are for public consumption but will not really do more to deter a creative, determined attacker. Instead, we need to be proactive, not reactive to what the last terrorists did. The real problem with measures like this is that they are very costly and incrementally conditioning the populace to accept the latest bureaucratic edit and infringements upon liberty without question and add little to no safety in return. Benjanmin Franklin was right, those who accept this type of initiative deserve neither liberty or safety, and in fact they will end up with neither.

Posted By Ed S on May 21, 2009, 2:13 PM

I've been through some of these machines, what they fail to tell you is that you must completely empty your pockets prior to entering the machine. And while they say that this type of scan eliminates the need for physical screening, this wasn't the case with me. I went through the machine and then they proceeded to hand pat me down anyway, so my question is what is the point of these machines if they still need to hand screen you afterwards? I don't see using these machines as a means to make the screening process go faster or easier for passengers, in fact it seems to slow the process down quite a bit.

Posted By frequent flier on May 21, 2009, 2:18 PM

I'd rather not have some TSA security guard seeing my kids pretty much naked. Sorry. Imagine the young teenage girl who is already self-conscious. I'm sure having to go through a scanner will do WONDERS for her self-esteem. I don't care if I'm a prude by European standards, but I don't know the full background or sexual habits of that screener looking at my kids' bodies. I'm sure the TSA doesn't, either.

Posted By aquamama on May 21, 2009, 3:53 PM

I would be for it if these scans were performed by same-sex personnel, but thats highly unlikely. This is pretty sick. Anyone willing to be scanned like that believing it is necessary for your safety doesn't deserve privacy in the first place. wake up, security has improved exponentially in years past, and you're saying now we have to be seen naked to be kept safe. even if you're not ashamed of your body, if anyone has the right to see it unclothed upon request, you've forfeited a God-given right. i dont have to fly that bad. i guess tsa finally figured out how to thwart terrorism by not just scaring would be terrorists, but scaring people away from flying all together.you dont have to avoid flying, just avoid TSA.

Posted By Chase C on May 28, 2009, 4:10 PM

"It is far too easy to pass through a metal detector with a plastic (and lethal) knife or other object. Polymer firearms abound and could be be smuggled aboard an aircraft and put together by an accomplice." --Posted By Jeff Peters on April 13, 2009, 10:30 AM

Uhh okayy..
Just so you know. every time I travel the airlines provide METAL (I repeat METAL!) knives for food.
METAL is obviously more lethal than PLASTIC..Hmm dont you think so???
Now, wouldn't a terrorist just use the MORE LETHAL, METAL knife instead????

THIS JUST PROVES THAT YOU ARE A COMPLETE IDIOT, SORRY TO SAY.

Posted By asdfQ on May 28, 2009, 5:27 PM

To Pam S.

Regarding your comment, "...maybe that's the price we have to pay to live in a free country that some choose to hate."

What you said is a paradox. I'm not trying to be rude but you and too many Americans don't have the slightest idea of what was necessary to obtain and maintain our freedom. You don't understand our Bill of Rights and its importance in protecting us from the undying threat of tyranny. Selling out our 4th Amendment right of privacy actually makes us less free.

I submit to you, this quote by a true American genius who truly had to pay dearly to live in a free country.

"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin, 1775

Historically, governments have taken one essential right. It seems insignificant, but later, they take another. This increases exponentially until the populace wakes up under tyranny. Consider the rise of Soviet Russia, North Korea, Mao's China or Nazi Germany. You can say this intrusion is for the greater safety of the innocent, but remember that “The road to hell is paved with good intentions.”

Our founding fathers tell us that our duty, as Americans, is to uphold the Constitution. Thomas Jefferson said, “The price of freedom is eternal vigilance." He’s not referring to terrorists; he’s referring to keeping watch on our liberty. I would suggest that a coward who would deprive our countrymen of their 4th Amendment right to privacy would be in violation of their patriotic duty to defend the Constitution. Couldn’t that same person be thought to “hate” this country and the liberties that make it so unique and great?

Life as a free person is inherently dangerous but has many rewards. Selling your dignity and privacy robs life of its zest.

I think Patrick Henry said it best:

“Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!”

Posted By LastBreathOfLiberty on September 3, 2009, 3:23 PM

I refused to step into this machine and was detained / patted down, given a slow 'thorough' baggage search (read: harassed as punishment) and cross examined until I missed my flight. Albuquerque to LAX.
Law enforcement (read: TSA) wants total power over the citizenry and will have it... following step-by-step implementation of their latest Orwellian project. Through incremental "airport security" we will have our assholes reamed for our own good.
When have Americans become sooo compliant? We are indeed a nation of sheep.

Posted By Bill Lawrence on November 21, 2009, 3:36 AM

Several commenters have mentioned the 4th amendment. Here it is:

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

First of all, where is the word "privacy"? Second, it doesn't say they can't search and seize, it says they can't do it unreasonably. A hand full of terrorists snuck weapons on board four planes and thousands of people died. Now they have a reason to search. And they aren't holding a gun to anyone's head to do it.

If this pisses you off enough to never fly again, that's fine. I'll be thinking of you never leaving your house again while I'm vacationing on a sunny beach in the South Pacific.

Posted By James Suits on December 21, 2009, 1:43 PM

I am a flight attendant with a replaced knee. I am so thankful for the whole body scanners as I have to go through security every day that I work. Some people talk about scanners getting a cheap thrill...yep, real cheap and not real thrilling. Give it a rest, you prudes. They look and go on to the next one. What do you think they do back in that little room? I feel sorry for you if you think it is an invasion of privacy or exciting. Wonder if those people that lost friends and family in the WTC think it is an invasion. Grow up and quit being such idiots and prudes!

Posted By Sue B on December 21, 2009, 2:46 PM

Whoever on here said that not only were the TSA staring at your image but other passengers must have been looking at something else. The person looking at the images first of all is the same sex as you and second of all is not in the same area where people are being screened. They communicate with the person at the machine via radio, hense the headset they were wearing which you have to have noticed.

I would rather have these scanners at airport than have an airplane blow up because a terrorist was wearing plastic explosives which metal detectors do not detect. Trust me, the screeners are not interested in staring at an image of you for their kicks.

Posted By Ed on December 21, 2009, 3:37 PM

From a CNN article: http://www.cnn.com/2009/TRAVEL/05/18/airport.security.body.scans/

Bruce Schneier, an internationally recognized security technologist, said whole-body imaging technology "works pretty well," privacy rights aside. But he thinks the financial investment was a mistake. In a post-9/11 world, he said, he knows his position isn't "politically tenable," but he believes money would be better spent on intelligence-gathering and investigations.

"It's stupid to spend money so terrorists can change plans," he said...If terrorists are swayed from going through airports, they'll just target other locations, such as a hotel in Mumbai, India, he said.

"We'd be much better off going after bad guys ... and back to pre-9/11 levels of airport security," he said. "There's a huge 'cover your ass' factor in politics, but unfortunately, it doesn't make us safer."

Hmm, uncover other people's asses to cover your (TSA's) own. Lovely.

Posted By VS on December 21, 2009, 6:29 PM

Where do you draw the line? Answer: nowhere. We are a democracy, so it's all right. We are the good guys. So fine. No problem. OK, so impose your new security - now, when is the average citizen of this country going to think about how we got to the point of having terrorists willing to blow up planes with innocent people? Oops - that's only really discussed in Old Europe. Sorry. We're busy with two wars. We had to lie to the world for the one of them - but we only did it because we are actually really nice guys.

Posted By Pana on December 23, 2009, 10:46 AM

I will do everything possible NOT to fly thru the US and, where that is not possible, I will request a pat-down.

Posted By Bobette Jane on December 27, 2009, 1:29 PM

This is outrageous!!! TSA has gone to far for a long time. And anyone delusional enough to think that this is really going to stop a determined terrorist who is willing to kill themselves for their cause is severely mistaken. Let me paraphrase a quote Mr. Benjamin Franklin is credited with:
He who would trade liberty for some temporary security, deserves neither liberty nor security.
He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither....Think about..... and you will realize Mr. Franklin is totally right. I would rather have my liberties and freedom any day over a false sense of security.

Posted By Shanacy on December 28, 2009, 11:42 AM

What is the radiation impact on a person's body?

Posted By lcochran on December 28, 2009, 2:47 PM

I would not go through those scanning thing. That is considered invasion of privacy. There are laws to protect you. I would sue anyone including the TSA if they think they would do that. They need to be sued period. We as Americans should not have to suffer because the Terrorist want to act dumb and stupid and carry bombs on board. The US needs to band all International flights into the United States. That will take care of all the problems.

Posted By Jason on December 28, 2009, 5:49 PM

I don't fly anymore, but for those who must fly, what about the x-ray exposure, which is cumulative? Are these machines really using x-rays? They say they are "x-raying through your clothes". I've had a lot of exposure already, thanks. And I don't believe one word the government says about anything. What about the people working the machines? If there are x-rays, shouldn't they be protected by being in a special room or wearing a lead apron or something. I'm so glad I'm old and I never have to fly again if I don't want to, and I don't. Sorry for anyone who does have to.

Posted By Linda in Arizona on December 29, 2009, 5:09 PM

I think the whole body scanner should be used as a secondary form of screening. I think thermal imaging would be a good method of primary screening. I don't think a full body pat down is the way to go as a stand alone alternative, seeing as how things could still be hidden in those private areas that aren't going to actually be patted down. Bomb-sniffing dogs should be at all airport security checkpoints as well.

Posted By Mitch on December 29, 2009, 11:22 PM

How come no one talks about the radiation dose one gets from these scanners? Higher risks of cancer?

Media seems to avoid discussing this issue. According to The Health Physics Society (HPS) reports that a person undergoing a backscatter scan receives approximately 0.005 millirems of radiation while the American Science and Engineering Inc. reports 0.009 millirems.

If I make two flights per week, how does this increase my risk of getting cancer?

It seems that companies making these scanners (General Electric) are using the Christmas Day incident to push forward with an idea that has been stale for the past few years.

Posted By Oldie on December 30, 2009, 9:19 AM

Why would anyone care about being seen like this? Im a nudist so if it wasn't against the law I would be actually nude while traveling. People are so uptight about something so frivolous.

Posted By Larry on December 30, 2009, 10:22 AM

I think this is a good idea. i'd rather be naked then dead. besides, i take my cloths off everyday at home. who cares if other people see you, you'd still be alive.

Posted By Minamihata kun on December 30, 2009, 12:11 PM

I am concerned about how much radiation we already encounter and how this added radiation will affect our health.

Posted By mary on December 30, 2009, 12:27 PM

To those who propose giving up rights and freedom for safety, why don't you give your life so that that many will have freedom. Isn't it better that a FEW should die so that the MANY can live free?

I always here the cowards willing to give up freedom for safety, even though the very rights they are so quick to give up, came at the expense of other's blood.

Cowards. Do you realize how selfish you are? Your safety in exchange for our freedom.

YES! IT IS BETTER THAT A FEW DIE, THEN THE MANY LOSE THEIR FREEDOM. KNOW THIS.

THERE ARE SOLDIERS DYING FOR THE VERY RIGHTS THAT YOU ARE SO QUICK TO SURRENDER!

Selfish and narcissist. Well done cowards. I'm sure you make our military proud as well as our founding leaders.

You are all getting what you deserve

Posted By This is freedom on December 30, 2009, 12:35 PM

To me this sounds like just an example of the government exploiting a real threat in order to push overly-invasive measures. Its just like the Patriot Act after 9/11, something needed to be done, but they took advantage of people’s fear to go way too far. This has been something that has bothered me alot recently, so Ive been following this type of stuff closely. I found a website http://www.littlebrotherprivacy.com that talks about this kind of stuff. There is some pretty interesting stuff on there, and I think it will make you think twice before you start signing away your rights in the name of defense from terrorism.

Posted By Jeff on December 30, 2009, 1:13 PM

I just don't understand the controversy. The full body scan produces an image which renders the person un-identifiable. Although you can identify the overall shape of the genitalia, breast and buttocks, they are hardly high-definition. In the end, the images basically look like a mannequin in plus size lingerie store. People, get over yourselves and your silly prudishness. Would you rather see yourself as a silly digital silhouette or as a burnt and disfigured casualty of a terrorist attack? Please keep in mind, this is a war of love of life versus love of death.

Posted By Joshua S on December 30, 2009, 3:28 PM

I have a better idea. If they look like a terrorist scan them, If they act like a terrorist, scan them. If they are a terrorist detain them.

Posted By DMC on December 30, 2009, 4:18 PM

If you want the TSA to hear you, go to http://www.tsa.gov/contact/index.shtm and leave feedback for them. Make a difference by telling them.

Posted By T Johns on December 30, 2009, 6:12 PM

Shame on you selfish people who advocate relinquishing our collective liberty just so you can fly worry free. What appalls me is what sheep we have become. It is not that I am squemish of some government agent seeing my naked body. I am not modest. What I am concerned about is where this will lead. Remember that airports were the first place that metal detectors were regularly used. Now, you cannot enter a government building (i.e. state capitol, county courthouse, etc.) without being required to go through one. Even public arenas such as the LA Staples Center require patrons to go through them. I promise you that this electronic strip-search will not end with airports. Someone here suggested that those of us who do not want to be strip-searched should take the train instead. I can assure you that train stations will be using this technology in the not too distant future. I have something else for you to think about. People already hide contraband such as illegal drugs within their body cavities. What would stop a terrorist from hiding a weapon or explosive inside their privates or up their rear-ends? Are you "anything to be safe" people ready to submit to a full body cavity search? Giving up your privacy in exchange for a marginal increase in security in air travel misses the larger issue. How much of your liberties are you willing to give away for a false sense of security? 9/11 has turned us into a nation of frightened sheep.

Posted By Kathleen W. on December 30, 2009, 7:16 PM

My question will there be a line for women and one for men? or will men that work at tsa be able to see women nude? What about people who have been abused? This may make them have more issues. Do they plan on scanning children? TSA workers have stole how much out of passengers bags this year, one got caught ebaying a News camera, and shall we trust them with our bodies too. Cant wait to see them selling nude stars scans on the web.

Posted By kat on December 30, 2009, 7:42 PM

Sickos who work for the TSA Will get to see children nude, even if the image is distorted there are going to be ppl at the TSA who get a kick out of that. Its just sick. The TSA is not know for hiring the best people, look up all the stores about them.

Posted By no on December 30, 2009, 7:50 PM

I have 'scanned' through the comments above and find many of them to be absurd. I am not prudish and can't imagine anyone getting off on my 55 year old body, or the abstracted images of anyone else, including children. However I am concerned about medical repercussions of this equipment on health (whether xray or other wireless scanning)and the potential use of the images for other purposes - i.e. insurance companies. I consider both of these to be threats to my rights. Has the AMA issued a position statement?

The fact is the promotion of this equipment has more to do with the fear mongering and ineptness of the government than it has with increasing safety. TSA and Homeland Security think that if they orchestrate an emotional dialog about the equipment, they can divert the attention of Americans from the real issue - they haven't a clue how to keep us safe, and are too deep into pseudo political correctness to design common sense procedures that will work. Government needs a reality wake-up and a change of so-called experts (or are they just lobbyists?)

Yes, I do believe that the push for this scanning equipment has more to do with the economic interests of the manufacturers than it's capabilities. I would have far more confidence in dogs trained to sniff for explosives than in this high priced equipment.

But this subject is just another nail in the airlines' coffins for me -- I lost interest in flying when it became more trouble than it was worth and I haven't set foot on a plane in 5 years.

Posted By E. Ruffing on December 30, 2009, 8:03 PM

It never ceases to amaze me how those who think only of civil liberties are full of criticism while things have been pretty quiet and safe at airports lately. I wonder what these same people were thinking and saying on 9/12.

It's unfortunate we have to deal with these types of issues but at least I know now that someone is being proactive in providing a more effective "solution" of some sort so that the next time I am 7 1/2 miles up in the atomsphere moving at almost 600 miles per hour, I won't wind up as food for the sharks.

To all the civilian libertarians, where are your constructive solutions? I am sure when a tragedy happens again, you'll be the first to complain that the government is not doing enough to make flying safer.

Posted By Alex on December 30, 2009, 8:18 PM

I've been flying overseas for the last 20 + years. Had to get a TWIC card to prove i'm not a terrorist of some kind. Now with all of that, I've got to be treated as one, all in the name of security. I wonder what Ken would say if the government got a photo of his 8-10 year old daughter. I have to fly for my work but my family will not be flying anymore. All vacations and travel will be limited to car or Bus. It invades the privacy Act. If this man was on the Terrorist List, his Visa should have been revoked and refuse a ticket to the US.

Posted By Royce on December 31, 2009, 7:00 AM

I have concerns about radiation exposure. I wonder if pregnant women are going to be forced to go through these things

Posted By Erin on December 31, 2009, 10:35 AM

look at the scan examples!!
and realize: just shove it where the sun(rays)
don't shine.
scanner defeated.

Posted By dennis on January 1, 2010, 2:49 AM

I am opposed to this. If you ask a psychologist or therapist how prevalent body image insecurity is in their clients you will find it comes up quite often. One of the reasons for teen suicide is "body image concerns" Lots of women are insecure about breast size {breast implants}, lots of men insecure about their genital size witness all the penis "enlargement" scams. Personally I am insecure and don't mind admitting it. Unless the person is my doctor, wife or girlfriend I don't want them seeing my "little guy and his two buddies!" And before some smartaleck tells me to growup I'll just say, I wish I could. You can read into that whatever you want to.

Posted By Mark G. on January 1, 2010, 3:18 AM

A number of private radiology imaging centers offer “body scans” for clinically healthy people who are interested in having their internal organs examined for any early signs of diseases. Physicians have become so dependent on these machines that they request a scan for many visits. The same theory has turned to airport security; a full body scan will be requested before boarding a plane, screening the healthy with low dosages of radiation. Medical implants such as cardiac and neural stimulation leads could be affected by the electrical field produced by a pulse generator and significantly alter (either increase or decrease) the waveform of a pacemakers pulse.

Airport Full Body Scanners work by Millimeter wave technology. This band has a wavelength of ten to one millimetre, giving it the name millimeter band or millimetre wave. These waves are considered Extremely High Frequency, the highest radio frequency band. EHF runs the range of frequencies from 30 to 300 gigahertz, they are also sometimes abbreviated MMW or mmW. These bands are also known as terahertz radiation. Terahertz radiation may interfere directly with DNA. The force generated is small but the waves disturb double-stranded DNA, creating bubbles in the double strand. These scanners provide exceptionally clear views of subjects by combining data from multiple X-ray images, but the increased exposure to X-rays, which cause mutations in DNA that, can lead to cancer. X-rays are considered ionizing (penetrating) radiation, ionizing radiation in any dose causes genetic mutations, which set all living cells exposed on the path to cancer. Cancers associated with high dose exposure include leukemia, breast, bladder, colon, liver, lung, esophagus, ovarian, multiple myeloma, prostate, nasal cavity/sinuses, pharyngeal, laryngeal, pancreatic and stomach cancers. Clothing and organic materials are translucent in most mm-wave bands. Perfect for detecting objects on subjects at airports. The scanner does allow the screener to see detailed images of body parts, as I explained with CT and MRI scanners.

Whole body scans of healthy people may be creating more problems than they solve by exposing healthy people to radiation. The risk for radiation over exposure may be small for single subject, but the number subject exposed to airport body scans will increase they risk by the millions. A normal CT scan of the chest is the equivalent of about 100 chest X-rays. Some scanners are equivalent of 440 conventional X-rays. The traditional X-ray machine detects hard and soft materials by the variation in transmission through the target. The backscatter X-ray detects the radiation that reflects back from the target. Several studies have suggested that people have been unnecessarily exposed to radiation from CTs or have received excessive amounts of radiation. A person undergoing a backscatter scan receives approximately 0.005 – 0.009 millirems of radiation. 1 mrem per year is a negligible dose of radiation, and 25 mrem per year from a single source is the upper limit of safe radiation exposure. Widespread overuse of body scanners and variations in radiation caused by different machines could subject many to radiation doses that could ultimately lead to thousands of new cancer cases and deaths.

It’s Gonna Be BEDLAM!

Posted By david stanton on January 1, 2010, 6:10 AM

these body scanners cause cancer, they hit you with high levels of radiation

Posted By kif on January 1, 2010, 8:14 AM

Why is there no conversation about WHY they're putting these systems in place? How about blaming the idiot terrorists for this? How about some talk about why this war is going on in the first place?
Yes, we're giving up yet ANOTHER of our personal liberties, but WHY is this happening? I'll tell you why - because insane terrorist cowards are TRYING TO KILL US. Does nobody else get this???!! Surely I'm not the only one who does?? The knee-jerk reaction to this latest round of attempted terrorism isn't surprising really is it? It really should be expected. If people REALLY want our freedoms protected, buck up and support the efforts of our troops overseas. And for GODs sake, the next time you're given the opportunity to change the current leadership - DO IT. If you don't, you will continue to see your precious little freedoms eroded one by one.

Posted By Dan on January 2, 2010, 10:26 PM

I will not use as long as it is harmful to my health...I fly often I would prefer some kind of lie detector set up at the airport asking me if I plan to harm or however they question us, at least no rays killing my cells. What about women who are trying to get pregnant, they need a better plan till these machine are harmless to us

Posted By MN on January 3, 2010, 1:29 AM

Who makes the scanners?

Posted By Chipolena on January 3, 2010, 2:45 PM

I wonder what kind of pervs will want to work for TSA. Expect lines outside their San Francisco recruiting office.

Posted By xyzzy on January 4, 2010, 9:31 AM

For those that are offended by these scans, they can opt for a body pat down, fully clothed - but for me, it certainly seems less invasive to be scanned than touched. America will never be the same since 9/11. We must do the best we can to make sure airliners are not used as weapons again. It seems that there are two types of opinions here - ones that would rather have an increased chance of death than subject themselves to additional airport security checks, or ones that would like to increase the odds of arriving at their destination safely, and are willing to be scanned in order to do so. After all it is not simply you, the airline passenger, that is harmed here but other passengers traveling with you, and the entire population on the ground that has no say concerning your objection to certain security measures. I believe airline travel is a choice, not a right. Freedom to have different opinions and speak openly on this blog is a right. Why would the assignment of airline security measures be our right also? Those who feel they cannot abide with these scans for personal reasons, may need to choose a method of travel that will not require them to be subjected to them. Just like I may choose to still travel via airlines even if these scans are not part of the security screening.

Posted By MJM on January 4, 2010, 12:28 PM

i wear my clothes for reasons, not because im ashamed of my body,, but because i believe remaining clothed in public to be socially and morally correct. i will not surrender my right to remain clothed to the government. i will not surrender my right to privacy, to liberty or to property. i will not surrender my weapons regardless of the intrusive laws the power hungry fear mongers pass..

THE WORLD DEATH RATE IS HOLDING STEADY AT 100% AND HAS SINCE THE BEGINNING OF TIME.

you have two choices... you can live in fear of it, letting it control you life, your decision making, infringe on your right and privilege, and make you wet yourself every time you think you might be in danger. OR you can grow a set of balls and take the defense of your life, your liberties, your property and your way of life if your own hands and when needed defend it to the death. your going to die anyway,,,, you might as well live free.

Posted By nd on January 5, 2010, 4:52 PM

Nicely said nd. Folks, if you take all of the terrorist attacks in the US since, and including Pearl Harbor, you come up with approx 5000 people killed. Approximately 73 people are killed each year by lightning strikes. Multiply that by the number of years since Pearl Harbor (68) and you get 4,964 total killed. So lets all walk around with lightning rods stuck to the top of our heads!

Posted By carl on January 5, 2010, 9:21 PM

what happens if a senior goes through the body
scanner with a pace maker,or a hearing aid,or is
in a wheel chair.i'm just curious.

Posted By doreen mcgrath on January 6, 2010, 8:51 PM

Just when we thought things in the USA were as bad as it gets now we have state sanctioned child porn. The TSA Officials must be pedophiles. Why else would they be push such perversions?

Posted By greenback on January 6, 2010, 10:13 PM

Give me a break people!!! Any safety measure is a good one....
Most of you walk around in public showing a lot more of your "privacy" to the world than these scanners.

Posted By diane on January 7, 2010, 2:45 PM

The efficacy of these scanners is not proven yet. An obese person can hide whatever they want within their outer fat deposits, because the scanners can only pick up 1/8″ under the skin or into a body cavity. In addition, these machines are very costly AND they are using money from the stimulus package! What nonsense!

Everyone is running around like chickens with their heads cut off just because of this one incident. The primary screenings were botched and if this man had transported the explosive in a body cavity, the machines would not have picked it up anyways.

Israel has an effective system of airport security due to their well-trained security. Their record of safety considering their current conflict speaks for itself. Most of their prevented attacks have nothing to do with scanners or other technology. They are simply trained in behavior profiling and questioning passengers.

google Anjum Malik from flyersrights.org. She knows her stuff.

http://alhambrauschamber.org/news/video-alhambras-anjum-malik-gives-her-expert-opinion-airline-security

Posted By Adam on January 7, 2010, 3:26 PM

Why only bodyscans for air travel? Why not trains? Why not buses? The government should scan all cars, when you pay a toll on the highway. Why not every time you come out of your house? We need to be "safe" you know! Please government, make us "safe"!

One question people should be asking is: Who's selling all these scanners to the federal government? Whoever they are, they are making a fortune with our tax money. Was the "Christmas bombing" staged to sell these scanners for billions?

People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both. - Benjamin Franklin

Posted By Chris on January 8, 2010, 1:22 PM

It's not just unbelievable the extent to which our governments are invading our privacy, but especially how we, the citizens, are willing to accept (and want!) this invasion of our privacy and restriction of our civil liberties.

Posted By Angela on January 10, 2010, 4:09 AM

The truth of the matter is that America has never even really been a free country. The only time it ever will be free is if crime stops completely, and that doesn't seem to be happening anytime soon. And all those people that say that this is an invasion of privacy, well they're right. It is. But who CARES?!? I personally hate the government, but I will gladly submit to a whole-body scan in order to prove that I am not dangerous in any way. And, again aimed at the anti-scan advocates, did you ever think about what would happen if the scanners WERE removed? Have you ever thought that maybe, just maybe, if we remove them and a terrorist is able to smuggle a plastic explosive, or possibly worse, on board a plane that YOU were flying on? I bet that you would wish the scanners were still there, wouldn't you? I personally don't care what a TSA agent sees on the screen, because, when it all boils down, pretty much nobody that goes through the scanner has anything that the agent hasn't already seen on someone else. But this is just my opinion, and I'm not trying to push that opinion on anyone else. I'm just stating my thoughts on the matter.

Posted By Alex on January 13, 2010, 11:06 AM

As I military member I cannot believe that some of you are so willing to give up the freedoms that we put our lives on the line for... it's ludicrous to me. I could not have said it any better than Chris did. There is NO trade-off, and some of you are too trusting in the government. The fact that more people are not outraged leads me to believe the government's and the mainstream media's scare tactics are working. I'll end with this...

Johann Goethe: “None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free.”

Posted By Concerned Military Member on January 13, 2010, 11:42 AM

Isn't the core of the problem Islam?

Posted By Harry on January 13, 2010, 7:20 PM

This push for body scanners is absurd.

For all the people that think this makes them safer, neither of the machines (backscatter or mm) penetrate very far. They aren't going to detect weapons and explosives in one's orifices. This leaves a viable means for terrorists to continue undetected. In other words, the machines won't get the job done.

Will people feel safer when everyone gets a cavity search or hard (penetrating) x-ray scan each flight? The later would be the equivalent of a chest x-ray, except for the whole body. Logically, this would maximize detection of hidden items, but does that go too far?

Being alive, we're each at risk of dying every day. The most common cause of death is heart disease, followed by cancer and respiratory problems. Accidents rank right after those. Homicide ranks a lot lower on the list. I assume that deaths to terrorism could be included somewhere in that stat. It's more likely that your plane would crash from mechanical failure than from terrorism, but we don't see the goverment and media in a stir to keep you safe in that regard.

Didn't the Amsterdam airport have body scanners before the underwear bomber attempt? Wasn't that guy on watch-lists? Didn't his father report on him well before? No measure will keep you safe as long as there's such incompetence as this. The security and information already in place would have been more than enough, if used properly.

Instead of fixing the issue of incompetence, we're told to give up more privacy in turn for some change that'll make us more 'safe'.

I have to agree with the servicemen posting here. It's unfortunate that others would throw away their freedom and the sacrifices made for it to get a superficial gesture of safety in return.

Posted By Ken on January 19, 2010, 1:35 PM

We are planning to install full body x-ray scanners at T.I.E.S. at the southgate Tarc building here in Topeka, where all doorways will have them the staff here to be quite honest really do care more about our personal safety than we do about all the retarded clients who work here, I could care less about whether handicapped people get cancer! I took this job to make money, not to put up with a bunch of retards!

Posted By Lisa Bowers on January 21, 2010, 3:03 PM

After reading TSA's website, I have some questions that I'd like TSA to answer. All of my information used in this post was taken from TSA's own web page at:
http://www.tsa.gov/approach/tech/imaging_technology.shtm

"Officers evaluating images are not permitted to take cameras, cell phones or photo-enabled devices into the resolution room."

So do these officers have to go through a scan in this very same device to make sure they aren't hiding cameras or cel phones in their pockets? If so, can they opt for a pat-down too? Do they get to choose whether someone feels their privates or just looks at them? Or do they simply say "No I don't have a camera" and their word is better than mine? If they are caught trying to sneak an item in, are they slapped on the wrist, fired immediately, or thrown in confinement without due process?

"This state-of-the-art technology cannot store, print, transmit or save the image. In fact, all machines are delivered to airports with these functions disabled."

So which is it? The machines cannot store, print, transmit, or save them? Or they can, but are delivered to airports with these functions disabled?

Also, there are two types of devices here. "Millimeter Wave" devices, which use radio frequency.. and "Backscatter devices", which, from TSA's own website: "Backscatter technology uses low level X-ray to create a two-sided image." From their website, it looks as though TSA is going to implement more Backscatter devices than Millimeter Wave devices........... So do I get a choice whether I want to be bombarded with radio rays or X-rays? Radio rays, x-rays, or a good old-fashioned genital groping pat-down? What will you choose?

Think I'll take a pat-down any day -- even though ALL of this is a violation of our Constitutional rights. But I won't even go there, since many will argue that throwing the Constitution out the window is better than being blown up. I'd rather be blown up. Where's the line-up for that? An airport with no scanners and relaxed security? If I am free, then why am I not able to make that choice and take my own risks? The only choice we're free to make is in deciding which way we'll be violated. Your flight is now boarding, expect some delays as we stop for a brief layover in Crazy Town.

Posted By Todd on February 3, 2010, 10:30 PM

If we allow this, than in few years from now we will see them all over the place. In schools, court, libraried, malls, etc. I do NoT want someone looking at my body! Its MY BODY. If we allow this to happen, wat next? a camera up in the anus to check for bombs or illegal immigrants lol. Seriously, this is way to much. We never needed this in the 90's because, people at that time did their jobs right, Now u hire any ghetto trash to do the job for minimual wage. and who knows they might b posting our naked images on websites, for jokes or for sexual pleasures. This is unconsitutional! disgusting! Pervasive!

Posted By Liz on February 8, 2010, 5:10 PM

If our government did their jobs correclty or did their jobs at all, than this wouldnt b needed. 9/11 was an inside job! Bin Laden was not caputered nor is even wanted by the FBI look it up people. Our government, is taking out civil rights slowly , scaring us,

Posted By Liz on February 8, 2010, 5:14 PM

I don't think its a problem that much since i travel a lot i think it best to have maximum security to ensure the safety of all passenger i don't want to see another 9/11 happen . I rather put up with a scan then die in a plane accident that could have been prevented

Posted By Kimiko on March 2, 2010, 1:04 PM

Ok, before anyone freaks out and thinks the illuminati is making their move for the NWO, where exactly did this information come from? I can't find a single other site on the internet to collaborate this. Is this offically documented somewhere by the TSA as their intention? I have to imagine this would be met with an uproar and be impossible to justify. I'm seriously suspecting this is fake.

Posted By Curious on March 21, 2010, 4:33 AM

ken, no, im a teenager and i am bothered by this, you are completely exposed and they could easily print off a picture of you for their own entertainment. the new full body scanners are ridiculous and i refuse to go through it when i travel, i will get a pat down. they are an invasion of rivacy and as a citizen i would like my rights to be respected. i am writing an essay on this so i know all about the scanners.

Posted By danelle on March 22, 2010, 1:07 PM

I'm not sure where the original poster got those images from but I can tell you for fact that they didn't come from a ATIX. I work with those and the pictures are not ever remotely to what is shown at the top of this page. I can't understand why people don't like this device but, you can always op-out and not go through it (yes it is possible to say no) next time you get in line go ahead and try it. You will be instructed to walk through the Garrett system just like before.

If you want to know what the photos really look like just read the signs the next time your in line at the airport (there are sample pictures posted to inform you of what we can see). You will find that they are black in white granny chalk board like sketches of a person.

Posted By 4282010 on April 29, 2010, 4:16 PM

I did a report on these scanners and I hope they implement them in every airport! To those twits that are so against it, TAKE THE TRAIN! DRIVE YOUR CAR! Stay off my plane!!! All your doing is blowing it out of proportion. I'd gladly go through this scanner a million times if it meant keeping terrorists from blowing up the plane my children and I are boarding! As far as I'm concerned, those of you that are so against it and are trying to petition them are just as bad as the terrorists themselves! Ever think about asking the families of those who died during 9/11 how they feel about them! I HAVE ASKED THEM! THESE SCANNERS COULD HAVE SAVED THEIR LIVES! THEY COULD HAVE PREVENTED 9/11! And you want to take them away? Don't like it? THEN GET OUT OF OUR COUNTRY! They're only trying to protect you.

Posted By Lee on May 5, 2010, 11:32 AM

To those of you who say 'the images are grainy' and they don't show everything ... please think a bit harder. Just as the TSA site says 'the storage feature is disabled', so is the image displayed manipulated by software.

I write software. You can bet that these machines are capable of exact detail, and certainly have the ability to store images. Imagine someone goes through with something questionable, they are then subjected to further 'scrutiny' in that specific area.

Well, let's say that is me and I didn't have ANYTHING questionable on me. Now I decide to due them for unreasonable search. They are gonna immediately want to be able to pull up that full-body scan image and point at this 'questionable item' on the scan. That would give them a reason to search. So the idea that they are just deleting these images is completely ridiculous.

They already admit that the face of the image is 'blurred by software'. Well, if so that means we have to just trust that TSA is altruistic and would never change the settings on these devices.

If you believe that they are going to show the public the actual detail of these images, you are crazy. Even the imaging machine makers sites show that the images released are not at full quality.

As for those who say the radiation is so low ... have you seen the coverage of hospital radiology departments over or under radiating patients? Basically these well-trained medical professionals whose ONLY job it is to use these machines are still screwing up. The can't even seem to read a doctor's order for a radiation level, and set the F---ing machine to that value. Sometimes they 'just forget' and you get the dosage of whomever was in that machine last.

Now you are wanting me to believe that these machines are safe? Do I get a stamp on my passport every time they 'scan' me so that I get free cancer treatment after the 10,000th scan?

Give it up people, refuse the scan while you can. After that let's all get together & create more private charter flights.

Posted By Suze on May 7, 2010, 5:22 PM

To those of you who say 'the images are grainy' and they don't show everything ... please think a bit harder. Just as the TSA site says 'the storage feature is disabled', so is the image displayed manipulated by software.

I write software. You can bet that these machines are capable of exact detail, and certainly have the ability to store images. Imagine someone goes through with something questionable, they are then subjected to further 'scrutiny' in that specific area.

Well, let's say that is me and I didn't have ANYTHING questionable on me. Now I decide to due them for unreasonable search. They are gonna immediately want to be able to pull up that full-body scan image and point at this 'questionable item' on the scan. That would give them a reason to search. So the idea that they are just deleting these images is completely ridiculous.

They already admit that the face of the image is 'blurred by software'. Well, if so that means we have to just trust that TSA is altruistic and would never change the settings on these devices.

If you believe that they are going to show the public the actual detail of these images, you are crazy. Even the imaging machine makers sites show that the images released are not at full quality.

As for those who say the radiation is so low ... have you seen the coverage of hospital radiology departments over or under radiating patients? Basically these well-trained medical professionals whose ONLY job it is to use these machines are still screwing up. The can't even seem to read a doctor's order for a radiation level, and set the F---ing machine to that value. Sometimes they 'just forget' and you get the dosage of whomever was in that machine last.

Now you are wanting me to believe that these machines are safe? Do I get a stamp on my passport every time they 'scan' me so that I get free cancer treatment after the 10,000th scan?

Give it up people, refuse the scan while you can. After that let's all get together & create more private charter flights.

Posted By Suze on May 8, 2010, 12:37 AM

The land of the free
And the home of the brave

/sarcasm

Posted By Ricardo Brown on May 15, 2010, 6:25 PM

People have lost their minds. The government is not your friend! They lie to us, and could care less if they kill you with back scatter radiation.
Create a crisis and force a solution. They brought down the twin towers and now we have to accept their security apparatus. We could stop all of this by simply refusing to fly.
Save some gas. Stop flying. Quit your crappy job. Tell your boss he's a useless idiot. Ditch corporatism. Hit em in the pocketbook.

Posted By Mark on August 26, 2010, 1:47 AM

the TSA has not been consistent on the safety of scanners. Different spokespeople and emails from the TSA say different things. "low risk" for most people is not good enough. i will not be getting xrayed 50+ times a year because a government agency says i should be ok in the future.

what happens when this scanner is not good enough? colonoscopies before boarding?

Posted By max on October 28, 2010, 2:19 PM

the TSA has not been consistent on the safety of scanners. Different spokespeople and emails from the TSA say different things. "low risk" for most people is not good enough. i will not be getting xrayed 50+ times a year because a government agency says i should be ok in the future.

what happens when this scanner is not good enough? colonoscopies before boarding?

Posted By max on October 28, 2010, 2:31 PM

My wife & I were picked out for one of these and I was wondering why the 3 guys were staring at their monitors during my wife's turn. OMFG!!! Sick bastards. This is a disgusting invasion of our privacy! I wish I knew what the machine did at the time and I would of done something about it!

Posted By Ramon on November 4, 2010, 1:03 PM

I'm in the military and Latino - If this is all about terrorism, why don't we profile like Israel does (the most hated people of the terrorist)? Here's the: Psychology meaning – "a description and personality traits of a person compared with accepted norms or standards". It's not prejudice but a cheaper, faster and more effective process. When I've been "pulled-to-the-side", TSA cares none for my military I.D. Will we offend the middle-easterns? Probably, but we (the U.S.), rather offend the majority. Some muslems ladies don't even want to remove their head covering for a driver's license photo. How will they submit to full body scan?
What's next, a personal id on your right hand or your forehead?

Posted By luis on November 17, 2010, 8:40 AM

No!!! to a fascist police state!
TSA is not needed and does not make us safer

Posted By Brent Campbell on November 17, 2010, 1:02 PM

Why not develop a detonator that would set off any explosive device worn in or on a body?

As I envision it, they could take each passenger, put him/her in a bomb-safe containment cell - I envision an old-fashioned telephone booth size item. Then activate the "initiator" for explosives. If the person is wearing a bomb anywhere in or out of their body - KABOOM! Problem solved. No more explosive. No more terrorist. And it would certainly discourage others from wearing "body-bombs," knowing they would be blown up with no collateral damage.

This would not take any longer that sealing the cell and hitting the "detonate" button. No bomb - no problem. Open the cell, have the next person step in. No more X-rays, body searches, etc., only a common metal detector for hidden weapons like knives since, presumably, the explosive exploder would also detonate ammunition. Even if it didn't the metal detector would detect them.

Posted By Lou on November 17, 2010, 5:10 PM

So the terrorists win without lifting a finger. They win by turning us into a paranoid police state in which privacy, health, and choice are sacrificed in order to keep airliners 100 percent safe, which is an unachievable goal in any case. As for the extra radiation, which is cumulative, who needs it? Contrary to the crap being peddled by the so-called experts, there is no such thing as a "safe" amount of radiation.

Posted By Shary on November 19, 2010, 1:40 PM

We will lose all are rights one by one. This is absolutely ridiculous! I don't want to fly anywhere so bad that my privacy should be invaded. Think!! Where else will these stupid machines be placed for our "safety". Why don't we all just take off our clothes as we stand and wait in line. I am thoroughly disgusted with this.

Posted By yvette on November 22, 2010, 6:01 PM

I have tried to see into both viewpoints for those opposed and those who "don't care". I can't help but feel like this is a complete invasion of civil rights and that the TSA nor Homeland Security should not have this kind of power, especially considering that this all started with the 9-11 joke. The real terrorists are the corporations that run the government at the top and are taking away freedom brick by brick openly with the tactics of fear mongering. It's going to open the door for more invasion eventually, as it has for years now. The Christmas underwear bomber was so convinient, just in time when TSA unvieled their machines in Canada to gain support to make their money in the the USA. Don't believe me? Do a little research outside of what Fox or CNN tell you and watch the "coincidences" pile up.
I can't imagine that the chances of a terrorsit getting on the plane with explosives after a standard pat down and metal detection are greater than a disgruntled airport employee with a child fetish going on a kiddie raping spree. Oh yeah, this person probably enjoyed the scan of your naked 5 year old. It's sick and so is this whole unconstitutional invasion of privacy. Since some of you are easily susceptable to fear, fear that.

Posted By Ryan on December 2, 2010, 6:26 PM

You can totally see that guys junk! lol

Posted By WOW on February 16, 2011, 9:56 AM

It's VERY hard to hide a weapon if you are nude, and alot more comfortable traveling that way albeit on a towel( sanitary reasons).I don't want to be touched or x-rayed and would prefer not being held up just to get on a plane. Like the worker ona nude cruise said", after the first day I didn't even notice that people were nude but rather I was shocked after the first clothed vacationer came on deck after getting used to the nudity from the previous vacationers!" We forgot about nudity on a two week cruise to the Carribbean only to dock in the Bahamas across from the Disney boat. Then we looked out the porthole to see EVERYONE on that boat STARING out at our boat and we wondered what they were ALL staring at... until we realized all the windows , portholes, doors were open ( since everyone was nude) and THEN we realized..... they were looking at US!!!!!!! No one closes their doors on a nude ship! Why?? Nothing to hide. Men and women shower together and don't give it a thought, doors wide open! BESIDES, NO MUSLIM IN THE WORLD will travel in the nude!! You want to find a terrorist? Tell him he MUST travel nude in the plane! It will NEVER happen!

Posted By gil cottrell on April 20, 2011, 4:06 PM

hi!!!

Posted By pense on February 2, 2012, 1:25 PM

Es war schön, diesen Artikel zu lesen. Im Moment bin ich wirklich versuchen, einen Blog begonnen für meine Website! Wünscht mir Glück!

Posted By uleglem wypadkowi on March 5, 2012, 11:16 AM

Ich lese Blogs. Es ist sogar besser als Lesen von Zeitschriften oder Bücher.

Posted By wypadek on March 7, 2012, 12:06 AM

Ich hätte nie gedacht, dass ich lesen Blogs genießen, aber dieser Artikel ermutigten mich. Thx

Posted By mialem wypadek on March 7, 2012, 3:25 AM

Es ist unglaublich. Ich war für die Website wie diese für eine lange Zeit gesucht und ich endlich gefunden!

Posted By odszkodowania on March 7, 2012, 3:26 AM

The Bachelor of Business Administration is a degree in business enterprise administration that offers understanding about the practical locations of a business and other points with regards to administration. By undertaking a BBA degree final decision building potential of a individual will be improved so they can take a effective decisions in small business.

Posted By Someone on March 7, 2012, 8:37 PM

Hey, I had this page in my bookmarks for some reason, I must have bookedmarked ya' late at night or something...... I'm going thru all my bookmarked blogs/forums etc and facebook etc to make sure others dont get scammed by the same sites i was scammed by.... ive paid for a service and for over a week and a half i havent heard a word!!! my chances of a refund???? arghhh this is why the internet is SUCH A GREAT TOOL cos you can spread a message to people from all walks of life..... please dont go to their URL you will only increase their traffic & alexa ranking lol..

Posted By David Chase (GOT RIPPED OFF BIG TIME) on May 18, 2012, 8:18 PM