X
Live Weeknights at 7PM ET
Welcome to TV's only source for all the stuff you care about from the coolest viral videos to the hottest new gadgets, comics and movies. Attack of the Show gets it before it gets out.

TSA Full Body Scanners on The Loop Tonight

Moye
Posted November 17, 2010 - By Moye Ishimoto

TSA Full Body Scanners on The Loop Tonight on AOTS

Tonight on Attack of the Show, The Loop covers the growing outrage over the Transportation Security Administration's use of full body scanners and physical pat-downs--adding yet another thing to dread during the upcoming holiday travel season. Kevin Pereira talks to Wired's Noah Shachtman about the security measures, concerns over privacy and more. For more news about TSA, check out yesterday's Loop discussion with John Tyner, a blogger who made headlines after refusing to be pat down by TSA workers at the San Diego airport.

Also on the show, Blair Herter interviews Daniel Radcliffe and Emma Watson about Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1, Jason "Mayhem" Miller talks about the new season of Bully Beatdown and Blair Butler highlights her latest comic book picks on an all new Fresh Ink. See you at 7PM!

Tags: The Loop

Comments are Closed

  • ddrew2u

    From now on let's call TSA scanners "sexters."

    If a male sexter viewer suggest his male remote viewer buddy (they seem only separated by a small screen in one video) take a look at a naked teenage girl, is he guilty of trying to pass child pornography? Is his buddy guilty of possessing that child pornography if he looks or of some big felony? If his buddy looking is not a big felony we have to make that law real fast. Is his male boss guilty of the same big felony if he lingers to look at the naked teen who caught his eye as he passed behind?

    Did I mention that sexter machines have only one view screen and only one viewer per sexter machine even though both sexes pass through it in American airports -- the latter not allowed in India or Pakistan airports. For all we know they cannot get enough female applicants to look at naked bodies all day -- viewing is not a TSA employee job; goes to outside contractors; maybe TSA doesn't want to take responsibility when it hits the fan.

    Wait; maybe buddy peeking would fit under one of those new state laws making it a big felony to plant a peek camera in a neighbor or tenant's apartment -- new law keeping up with new technology. What iron clad protections should (nothing anyone knows of now) be put in place to protect us from buddy peeks -- a much more likely crime than any terrorism (99 lashes if you try it in India or Pakistan :-])? Hard to make much of an argument for that level of protection, isn't it, as long as males are complacently allowed to view shower-stripped, naked females?

    In a bad year we lose 43,000 lives to traffic accidents. We would not willing to strip search every man woman and child (even in front of same sex) 3 times a year on the average (billion airline passengers a year) and sexually touch 1/8th of the population (or more as the process expands) to do something about that. It wouldn't be America anymore.

    The key thing about being American is individual freedom and personal rights. It is not worth taking away our sexual privacy if a plane goes down every month (out of 5 million flights a year) -- not that the current "security theater" could foil a determined terrorist.

    Posted: December 3, 2010 8:29 AM
    ddrew2u
  • ddrew2u

    Media DADT on OPPOSITE-sex airport scanning?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch ?v=YLpOcEtsElI&feature=pla yer_embedded
    This company demo shows a male remote viewer examining both naked men and women and a 4 1/2 foot tall pubescent girl! Two other demos show young females examining naked males. All the better to promote sales in places without room or resources for two scanners -- or who wont go to the bother of separating the sexes? But an underage teen "sexting" another underage teen can get both arrested.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch ?v=xKnY8-G26Ww&feature=rel ated
    This video shows both female/male and male/female TSA viewing. The remote viewers seem only separated from each other (and who knows who else might be roaming past) by short eye shields. But if they cannot see us directly it's all right. Just don't sneak a strip searcher into a school or a womens' club or it's 10 years.

    Don't like scanning/groping, don't fly?:
    Constitutionally that is amounts to saying if you don't want your house searched don't buy a house. You may go about your daily business without being strip searched (by the opposite sex?) or private area touched (opposite sex frisk stories pop up -- in this AP story what looks like a TV monitor sits next to the scan monitor) -- even if it could protect against the 1 in 20 million chance that a terrorist wants to blow up your flight. Clearly does not fit "administrative search" first-principles which requires low invasiveness and high need. Listen to America's top young constitutional scholar Jeffery Rosen: http://www.washingtonpost.com/ wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11 /24/AR2010112404510.html.

    Eighth grade math debunks the need:
    According to Dana Milbank in the Washington Post it would cost $50 more per ticket to achieve Israeli level security that could actually catch (and therefore deter) a terrorist. How many are ready to fork over? Must not be a very material threat, then.

    Common sense says scanning/groping wont even work:
    Current scanning and groping wont stop drug-trafficking: they'll go in to deeper cavities or us fatter mules. A homegrown terrorist who can't figure that out can always buy an overseas round-trip ticket. Meantime, millions of the billion who fly domestic every year are on the highway -- getting killed in highway accidents -- to avoid intimate privacy violation they (and their children) just cannot stomach.

    Posted: December 3, 2010 8:27 AM
    ddrew2u
  • kcw5821

    Oh yeah, I'm availble to play the traveler if you get Hooters girls...

    Posted: November 24, 2010 10:20 AM
  • kcw5821

    How quick can you make a TSA video with traveler's choice of Hooters Girls or Chip & Dale dudes doing the pat down? Should be viral...

    Posted: November 24, 2010 10:18 AM
  • yahwehufos

    I agree with that one guy.

    Make the TSA workers hot and if you ask for the pat down you should get a free handie for your troubles.

    Posted: November 18, 2010 12:39 PM
    yahwehufos
  • Cell34

    Sooooooo, because the kid was five years old that means it would be impossible for the dad to make him wear a vest of Semtex or sheet explosives right?

    I understand not wanting to have your privacy violated, and thats awesome. If TSA wants to come to my house and search me I would be 100% against that. But you know what I am 100% for? Being able to fly home to Michigan without exploding.

    It is the little things in life that matter to me. Like a cool glass of lemonade on a hot summer day, or not being blown to bits somewhere over the midwest.

    So once again, PROTECT US! But don't search our children. PROTECT US! But leave that wheelchair alone! PROTECT US! But God help you if you think a pregnant woman could ever be concealing anything.

    Before anyone else complains I would love to hear the alternate solution. So people don't want body scanners, and they don't want pat downs... Do you think TSA can create some type of Minority Report Omniscient being that can see into the future? Is that what everyone is hedging their bets on?

    I agree with pilots not being screened since if a pilot wants, all he has to do to bring down a plane is push forward. Therefore screening them is silly. But if I am getting on a plane I want everyone else checked.

    So is a five year old likely to go to the C-4 store and build a bomb? No.

    But is it possible that his dad could tell him that he needs to wear his "saftey vest" to keep the monsters off the plane? Yep.

    If you want to see what happened when good trusting people got to hang out with terrorists recently, go to Youtube and type in "June 2009 Terror in Mumbai". Watch the video, then come back here and tell me how wrong it is to pat down a kid. Or tell it to the pregnant lady who got gunned down when she tried to cover her child.

    Right now everyone has an endless list of complaints, and then when something goes wrong it will be an endless list of questions asking "How could this have happened".

    Bunch of idiots if you ask me.

    NINJA CHAD

    Posted: November 18, 2010 2:31 AM
    Cell34
  • chocolatejeebus

    Clearly Americans DON'T feel they have to diminish their democracy to protect their democracy, hence the outrage. It seems to me so many of those "watching from the outside" think that the bureaucrats (sort of) running things, or those with the loudest voices (protesters) represent the majority. If I was of that mind set I would think that all Brits are violent college students willing to hurt and damage to make clear their opinion or that all Muslims want to kill or martyr themselves for their religion.

    Posted: November 17, 2010 4:35 PM
    chocolatejeebus
  • Julian2

    Americans feel for some reason that they have to diminish their democracy to protect their democracy. It's weird, but funny, to watch from the outside.

    Posted: November 17, 2010 4:16 PM
  • jbirdx07

    Today on a talk radio show in Atlanta a woman called in about this to tell her story. Her, her husband and 5 year old son went to see her parents. When they got to security the body scanner in their line didn't work so they had to have a body search. The TSA agent did a groin check on her 5 YEAR OLD SON!!!! Her husband lost it and told the agent if he went anywhere near his son's privates he would have him to deal with. The agent called a supervisor and all hell broke loose. Seriously TSA, a 5 year old blond hair blue eyed little boy. This job would be a pedofile's dream job. This is why I don't fly anymore and I can fly Delta free.

    Posted: November 17, 2010 3:48 PM
    jbirdx07
  • Cell34

    What are they going to sue over? Voluntarily submitting to additional security? As soon as you get in line it is implied consent to be searched. They have signs all over the airport that explain this. Just like at the Border, as soon as you pull your car up to enter or return from Mexico or Canada you are saying "Search away".

    Instead of being a bunch of whiny cry babies that try to sue everyone and everything every time we stub our toe or drink coffee that is too hot, people should consider the alternatives.

    Make two lines, one with screening, one without.

    You want to get on a plane that can be hijacked easier, feel free. I'll stand in a line that uses a device which has what, like 1/100th the radiation you would get from the sun in a normal day?

    People in this country just constantly need something to cry about. PROTECT US! But don't make the lines too long! PROTECT US! But don't search us. PROTECT US! But don't use any tools that would actually allow you to protect us.

    Bunch of whiny sheep if you ask me.

    NINJA CHAD

    Posted: November 17, 2010 2:32 PM
    Cell34
  • John-Galt

    Freedom beats security any day.

    Posted: November 17, 2010 1:29 PM
  • SPE825

    I hope the gov, TSA and everyone involved with this gets sued.

    This will cause a huge legal problem in the near future when people that have to travel for work refuse to travel due to this invasion of privacy and then get fired from their jobs. They'll sue their employers, who will then sue the government, and on, and on.

    Also, just wait until the day when a father and his teenage daughter go through the airport and he has to see someone (even if it is a female TSA employee) grabbing his little girl's junk. There will be an assault for that some day, and a TSA employee will rightfully get their a$$ handed to them by an angry parent.

    Posted: November 17, 2010 12:56 PM
    SPE825
  • JustTheBeginning

    As soon as another 9/11 hits everyone will be saying "we should have had more security!"... Cant have your cake and eat it too ladies, suck it up and deal with it.

    Posted: November 17, 2010 12:03 PM
    JustTheBeginning
AdChoices