CBS says the have a poll that shows Americans overwhelmingly support full body “naked” scanners at airports, despite what some “civil rights groups” have to say about them.
CBS says:
Although some civil rights groups allege that they represent an unconstitutional invasion of privacy, Americans overwhelmingly agree that airports should use the digital x-ray machines to electronically screen passengers in airport security lines, according to the new poll. Eighty-one percent think airports should use these new machines — including a majority of both men and women, Americans of all age groups, and Democrats, Republicans, and independents alike. Fifteen percent said airports should not use them.
You can check out the fill poll here.
Meanwhile, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano wrote in an op-ed in USAToday:
…We ask for cooperation, patience and a commitment to vigilance in the face of a determined enemy.
As part of our layered approach, we have expedited the deployment of new Advanced Imaging Technology (AIT) units to help detect concealed metallic and non-metallic threats on passengers. These machines are now in use at airports nationwide, and the vast majority of travelers say they prefer this technology to alternative screening measures.
AIT machines are safe, efficient, and protect passenger privacy. They have been independently evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration, the National Institute of Standards and Technology, and the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory, who have all affirmed their safety. And the weapons and other dangerous and prohibited items we’ve found during AIT screenings have illustrated their security value time and again.
What do you guys think?
More From Consumerist
-
Congressman: Maybe The Government Shouldn’t Propose New Internet Regulations For 2 Years
-
When Critics Attack: So About That Review Of Guy Fieri’s Times Square Restaurant…
-
Does It Make Sense To Ban Pit Bulls When Most People Can’t Even Identify One?
-
Poll Says Almost Half Of You Are Going To Drink At Least One Soda Today
-
Best Buy Founder Writes Lovelorn Letter To Board In Buyout Quest: "I Am Not Going Away"
Based on the pictures of the scans that I’ve seen there is no reason to worry that your ‘naked’ pictures will be recognizable. Not even your own mother would recognize you from the scan image.
Thank you Mrs. Napolitano, your opinion is noted.
You can also look at this Backscatter image: http://www.scottosphere.org/images/backscatter-xray-scan.jpg
Just Google Backscatter images and you will get a feel for what they look like.
Can I google Naked picts and get even hotter/clearer picts
I like to play the safesearch challenge on Google. Set the filter to strict and see how long it takes to find a totally raunchy image in the image search. It is actually disappointingly easy to get past the filters to porn.
In all honesty, people generally dress more revealing in real life than what you can really see in that pic. Basically what I see in this picture is a large bodied woman carrying a gun. However I couldn’t tell you if this were a white or dark woman. I couldn’t tell you her age other than the fact that she appears to be an adult. I couldn’t tell you what color her hair is or if she even has hair for that matter. The only way that I could possibly tell who this person was would be if I knew who the person was before I was shown the pic.
The issue has NEVER involved recognizability. That is indeed irrelevant. It has ALWAYS hinged upon the CHOICE as to whether one is revealed or not. It is a fundamental element of self-autonomy.
dude shes black, just look at dat junk in her trunk! prolly 30-40 yrs old. either that, or a realy getto white gurl
Then you haven’t seen all the pictures. Those ones from the article earlier today? Yeah, that ain’t them.
I don’t care much what they look like. I do have an issue with the radiation levels and that they will cause skin cancer due to how they penetrate the skin and are concentrated there. I also see no point in more security theater. I would rather have more risk than more of this crap. Most people who have discussed this would rather take the risk and not use these with a much smaller minority of scaredy cats who are willing to use them.
“Based on the pictures of the scans that I’ve seen”
You are poorly educated on this matter. Obviously their tactics of showing low-res shots from old technology is working for their PR. Read up on them.
Nobody is making people fly either. If you dont want to be scanned then drive or stay home
Maybe you aren’t required to fly if you sell burgers at McDonald’s. People with real jobs are often required to fly.
False choice fallacy.
I’ll be glad to inform all the police, firemen, medical professionals and teachers that since they don’t have to fly that they don’t have real jobs anymore. Nice assholish response.
All of those professions may include the attendance of conferences and trainings that may be held in places farther away than is convenient for travel by car.
Noone is required to fly. This is the modern age and we have things like teleconferenceing, video teleconferencing, email, fax, etc… There is no NEED to travel for a job
For you and your offspring’s sake I hope that comment about not “NEEDING” to fly to work was either a troll or sarcasm.
You don’t have much of a job. Some jobs demand a physical presence.
Many jobs do require travel and require a physical prescence at the remote location. I travel about 1 week a month for my job, and we are using web conferencing more, however it can not replace an onsite visit where I need to tour and inspect a 50,000+ square foot facility. Rather than traveling for 2-3 days to conduct my work onsite, we use web conferencing to review paperwork and conduct interviews, and then we can schedule an onsite visit for the facility walk thru which now only takes a day, meaning I can visit more sites in a single trip.
how do you propose we get our employees to a conference in Hawaii if we don’t need to fly? if we don’t go to that conference, we don’t pitch our product, and we lose projects.
your logic is fail.
“Noone is required to fly. This is the modern age and we have things like teleconferenceing, video teleconferencing, email, fax, etc… There is no NEED to travel for a job”
You’ve never had a job of any importance, I see.
“Nobody is making people fly either. If you dont want to be scanned then drive or stay home”
If you don’t want to be strip searched, don’t drive.
Please tell me, what highway do I take to drive to Honolulu, from Boston?
Easy. Drive to Seattle and Kayak across the Pacific Ocean. Google Maps FTW!
They do have an interstate in Hawaii…..
Which road(s) connect the west coast, ACROSS THE PACIFIC OCEAN, to that highway?
Nobody is making people talk either. If you don’t agree with your right to free speech being taken from you then just don’t speak.
Yea!
Or, if you’re too scared to fly without knowing that someone’s seen the other passengers naked or groped, them, why don’t YOU stay home?
That’s a very slippery slope. Thousands die do to drunk driving. A 9/11 can happen every year and You would save more lives by having every vehicle in America equipped with a breathalyzer the vehicle won’t start if your past the legal limit. Why not implement this if the goal was safer travel
Because I can drive to Europe to see my dying Grandmother. (And no, staying home is not an option. If you suggest that, you’re a bigger idiot than most.)
Those are the older machines. Go look up pictures on the new stuff. You can see exactly what the mans penis looks like with lots of detail.
You think anyone cares what your penis looks like?
The only people that I’d imagine that would have even a little valid concern about these would be celebrities who don’t want to worry about their scans ending up on a website somewhere. But as for the rest of us? Again, nobody gives a shit what our junk looks like unless we have explosives shoved up it.
I would care if someone other than my husband was looking at my naked body. Not even my doctors get to see that, just parts.
Of course, if you have explosives shoved up your junk, the scan isn’t going to pick them up. Also, how wide does your urethra stretch that you can get explosives up there?
I care because they care. When TSA employees refer to the machine as the “Dick Measuring Device” I know my beef is being examined by a bunch of middle-school-minded assholes, and that’s what bothers me.
OH NO! A penis!!!!
I could care less who sees me naked. I’m not ashamed of my body or my penis.
Let me know when your balls fall off:
http://arstechnica.com/science/news/2010/11/fda-sidesteps-safety-concerns-over-tsa-body-scanners.ars
Isn’t one of the “features” of these devices not being able to save the images? There should be no high definition penis for anyone to reference.
Nobody would be recognizable if there were no way to save and store the scans.
No.
The TSA insisted that the machines have the capability to store the images even if they aren’t allowed to use them.
http://gizmodo.com/5692198/a-tsa-success-story
Guys we’ve seen the pictures..there is no making out any certain body parts from these scans. They’re fine. It’s still uncomfortable, agreed, but it’s that or the feel-up.
“Guys we’ve seen the pictures”
How? They can’t be saved. My government told me that the images are immediately deleted. Either you’re lying or they are.
Those were the older model, just run a Google image search for “Backscatter” and you’ll see the newer model:
http://www.google.com/images?q=backscatter
Or GASP, they change both methods to something that is actually effective.
What pictures are you talking about? The ones from the consumerist article earlier today? Those were taken by different type of machine than the ones used at airports. The ones used at airports can tell if you are circumscribed or menstruating.
But they don’t really protect people from anything. Oh no, Random Guy has a Bic lighter in his pocket. GET HIM! If a terrorist wanted, he’d just detonate himself *IN* the security line on a high volume travel day. That alone would be a statement, and the scanner would do nothing.
The scanners DO help detect things that shouldn’t be there, true, but they’re not really there to protect passengers. It’s more to protect the planes. There is minimal to no security in the airport lobbies, ticket counters, baggage claim. And that’s the problem, really. If somebody wanted to do something, they could just load up a suitcase full of explosives, walk in during one of the many hectic days of travel season around the holidays… wouldn’t be pretty.
More and more and more layers of security, but what exactly are they preventing? Loopholes abound.
That would kill a lot more people than a single plan crash, unless the debris hits others people.
The only reason I can think that they don’t currently do this is airplanes are a bit more terror inducing when used as weapons, and larger amounts of explosives are more likely to have the FBI breathing down your neck before you can act.
At least, I hope that’s the reason: they’re getting caught before they can build big enough bombs, rather than because they haven’t thought of it yet.
Not really. ANFO (the same stuff that Tim McVeigh used) is quite easy to come by. All you do is mix Ammonium Nitrate dry fertilizer and Diesel fuel. Granted it’s not easy to detonate, lending to its use in mines and quarries for decades. But still not difficult to obtain. My old man buys a quantity of Ammonium Nitrate every year to mix in with his herbicides…Ironically he keeps it stored in a small shed next to the Diesel tank.
A few 55 gallon drums in the back of a rental truck was all it took to destroy the Murrah federal building in Oklahoma City. Yet I don’t see the feds keeping better tabs on purchases of Ammonium Nitrate or truck rentals since the OKC bombing or the first world trade center attack.
Take Image, Bring to Photoshop, adjust tones (I find Sepia works well)
I’ve seen the pictures, and manipulated them, and you are so completely wrong that you should have merely kept quiet and be thought of as wrong.
i am curious as to what images you have been looking at. because these look pretty clear to me. or at least clear enough to make me very uncomfortable. perhaps you feel ok with them, i don’t. and since i also don’t want to be groped, my option is to not fly. and i’m ok with that.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1077800/Airport-admits-strip-search-body-scanners-WILL-people-naked.html
http://blogs.courant.com/rick_green/2010/07/backscatter-airport-screener-m.html
She’s talking about those pictures from Florida that were just released. It’s a different technology from what airports are using, and the pictures are pixellated like an Atari 2600 game.
The airport scanners are definitely full-monty territory.
Maybe they won’t see nipples, but they see ENOUGH. Enough that people could do really disgusting things to them with little imagination required.
if it exists, there’s already a fetish for it. undoubtedly, someone somewhere gets off to these images already, nipples or not.
Apparently 4chan has been obsessed with “xraying” pictures long before these machines were put into use. Blecch
just because i know it could happen, doesn’t mean i need details…. ugh, now that’s stuck in my brain. thanks
Couldn’t I just google “Naked picts of people” and get a lot more images that require no manipulation and are hi-res, for free?
Didn’t get enough replies when you posted this comment elsewhere in this thread?
It’s not about seeing pictures of people who deliberately pose naked, it’s about being coerced into being photographed naked or have your privates groped so that one may use air travel. If it really made it safer then it would be acceptable but all you really need are obese terrorists to hide bombs in their rolls. Neither patdown nor backscatter imaging is likely to find it.
No, it’s about people who say that there will be naked photos of them somewhere. Notice the whole article today about the scanner in the courthouse storing images, and the fear that the TSA is doing it? That’s the problem, there’s no one reason to hate the scanners, so people are latching onto whatever they can. Kind of like vaccines.
No no no. Full-body scanners at the airport are NOT the same as vaccines. There have been many scientific studies conducted validating vaccine efficacy. These are a few related links my 5 seconds of Googling uncovered.
http://www.cdc.gov/flu/professionals/vaccination/effectivenessqa.htm
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=2040
http://www.whale.to/vaccine/efficacy.html
I can’t seem to find any scientific studies related to the efficacy of full-body scanners vis a vis airport security or preventing terrorism in airports. Mostly just speculation and conjecture.
Take the hyperbole down a notch and stop helping the Jenny McCarthys of the world spread their unfounded unproven bullshit.
I’m not even going to click your links. Instead of knee-jerking hyperbole on your part, read my comment. People are latching onto different aspects of the scanners in an attempt to prove them evil. They are moving the goal posts and changing everyday. First it’s radiation. When you get more flying than you would sitting in the machine for 20 minutes, they then say child pornography. Then it’s stealing bio-metric data, etc….
Or . . . maybe . . . or maybe they all happen to be legitimate concerns?
They shouldn’t have to be proven evil to get rid of them. They should have had to have been proven effective in order to be used in the first place.
It’s not changing the goalposts if every one of them is a valid concern. I didn’t have a problem with TSA security until the machines and the patdowns.
Is that even a serious question?
Or are you really so thoroughly frightened by the terrorists, and lied to by your government that you don’t understand the legitimate privacy concerns involved with these machines?
The question you should be asking isn’t “why shouldn’t we subject ourselves to nude-o-vision” the question should be “Why should we subject ourselves to nude-o-vision.”
But to answer your question: Yes, you could easily down load a lot of porn from the internet. And yes this is different. For example, why do you wear clothes if you don’t mind having people see you naked?
It’s weird. All peeping toms just must just not have access to the internet.
So now I know.
You saw the wrong images. Those blurry images were from the millimeter wave scanner, not the x-ray backscatter. The backscatter images are VERY detailed, and you would totally be able to recognize anyone you know in them if the face were not blurred out.
Damn is that you in the Avatar? Why don’t we do a test and see what we really can see. Anyway, according to you we wouldn’t be able to make out any body parts right?
People are coming out with stories about how they hear the TSA agents snickering that “the hot one” should get dragged over and watching a group of co-eds get dragged over for pornoscanning.
Here’s a real picture from a backscatter x-ray machine (which also uses ionizing radiation – another sticking point) where you can CLEARLY see everything. Keep in mind this is 4 years old and a low resolution picture. The images today are likely much more enhanced.
http://dontscan.me/images/John_Wild_1.jpg
I noticed his penis likes to point to the left. I should not know that about anyone.
Indeed. Despite the expression, “how’s it hanging” rarely needs the honest answer.
I’d be nervous they’d see my chest and discover where Quato has been hiding.
Ever get a suit made? When the tailor asked me if I “dressed right” or “dressed left” he was asking which pant leg the penis normally shifted toward …
Ok I can see what appears to be a naked man. Yes, we can all see his penis but I’m pretty sure that we all already knew that he had one before we saw the pic. Can you tell me who he is? Can you tell me his nationality? What color hair or eyes does he have?
I honestly doubt that the majority of people would even recognize a scan of themselves if they saw one.
his name is robert paulson
anyone hear an echo in here?
… his name is Robert Paulson
If plastic explosives the size of a nipple must be seen, the one’s made of flesh need to be visible too. Otherwise the machines are worthless
Yes which is exactly why coworkers made fun of a TSA workers penis size
“It’s either that or” you stand up as a human being and refuse to have your rights violated by anyone, unto bankruptcy, imprisonment, or death, let alone inconvenience.
or fighting back. You know, actually standing up for what’s right, or what you believe in. People do it from time to time, and it sometimes it even works.
INCORRECT. There are 2 types of scanners – millimeter wave and x-ray. The x-ray scanners will show you EVERYTHING. The millimeter wave scanners are a joke – if you think you can see anything useful at all, you’re a marketer for the manufacturer, with cataracts and an active imagination. That’s the type of image that was leaked today.
http://www.adepost.com/2010/02/10/kindly-refuse-humiliating-invasions-of-our-privacy-airport-scanners/
The image there? The left half is the scanner image. The right half is … just colored in, with photoshop. Just TINTED in flesh-tone, with the light-or-dark values reversed.
And it looks like a straight, stripped-to-her-skin NUDE photo.
That image is a known fake. Stop it.
There are more than enough reasons to hate both these scanners and what they represent without making shit up.
Known fake? Not known to me – your claim is the first I’ve heard of that. All I did was google for backscatter images, and looked for one that was nice and clear.
You can give a picture of a fully clothed person to someone who’s good with Photoshop and end up with a convincing nude pic of the person.
Survey says……X
http://trueslant.com/KashmirHill/2010/01/27/tsa-scanner-porn-hoax-fools-gizmodo-drudge-report/
lol so the pic that everyone was so up in arms about was a fake.
Responses?
People who in any way excuse these machines are fascists, yourself included. You are what’s wrong with America.
haha yep ya caught me..completely 100% fascist. no really just to clarify, all 30 of you people blasting me, i misunderstood the previous post of the stored body scans..i now know that they are very different from the back scatter images, and i would like to redact my original comment.
CBS is simply repeating what the government told them to say, in poll form.
Or, you know, refuse to be searched at all. No one’s MAKING you fly.
Look up false dichotomy.
And what percentage of the people polled travel on any sort of regular basis? I would guess that more than half of all Americans don’t fly at all in any given year.
More than half? I would say that maybe 15% of americans and thats a big maybe, fly once a year.
According to Nate Silver (http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/), 7% of the population makes up 57% of the total air trips, which is exactly why this poll is flawed. If you polled frequent flyers you would certainly find a different result (although not necessarily a majority opposed).
I disagree. Check out the Travel Safety and Security forum on Flyertalk. It’s not 100% opposed to the TSA, but at least 95%.
which is an even better argument for not adding to the radiation exposure for those frequent fliers!
Make sure and read the comments after the poll.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/11/15/politics/main7057902.shtml
I haven’t been on a plane since 2004. This kind of thing along with all the other crap you have to put up with flying will make me seriously reconsider any non-essential trip that would involve air travel.
I say they just completely made up that poll.
CBS = Creating B*S*
Clearly, 1300 americans = ALL AMERICANS.
To be fair, with the proper statistical analysis, 1300 people isn’t a terrible number when completing a survey representing the whole country, if they had the survey professionally run by people who’s graduate studies and professional careers are built around writing and conducting non-biased polls. From my quick scan of the docs on the CBS website, it does look like a professional job.
However I do have some nits to pick about the question that was asked. The poll was conducted from 11/7 to 11/10, which is about a week ago, and before some of the pictures surfaced on the internet.
ALSO, the question was very generic “Do you support full-body x-rays,” and there’s absolutely room for people to respond one way or the other without fully understanding what it is (they could think it’s like a x-ray image at the doc’s, for example)…It wasn’t that different than saying “Some states have decided to import goat cheese for consumption by prisoners. Do you support importation of goat cheese?” Without a real disclosure of the pros and cons, then people are making uninformed decisions. (Heck, my state explains both sides of a ballot question more clearly than this on the official ballots.)
It was also not made clear in the context of the question that the other option is the enhanced pat-down, and it seems to me (though I could be wrong) that that info would potentially influence people’s decisions.
In short? While i believe the polling is accurately collected, they’re summing up data from a single question in a larger poll. I would be very interested to see the data in polling where ALL the questions were on this topic.
“I say they just completely made up that poll.”
The news agencies would NEVER lie for propaganda purposes! That’s never been done before!
They did. When I clicked through the survey less than 24 hours prior it was 90% against the scanners and somehow it did a 360 afterwards? Either they are making it up and/or they are horrible with statistics.
Its amazing how their poll has overwhelmingly different results than the consumerist poll and many other polls asking the same question.
rabble rabble complain rabble
I’m with you. I really don’t get it. If someone wants to oogle over an x-ray image of my junk what the hell do I care?
Well that’s your choice, isn’t it? Other people choose the opposite. What used to be a perfectly reasonable personal choice – who gets to see photos of oneself naked – is now the guiding choice on whether or not you may use the air travel infrastructure in this country; which by the way your taxes paid for as the airlines have been government subsidized for years.
Others also may not be able to make the same choice you have, for example Muslim women are expressly forbidden from being naked in photos or allowing other men to touch them as would occur in a pat down. That’s a religious restriction which they are free to practice, until suddenly they want to fly, at which point the government is overriding their right to freedom of religion.
This is not a simple black and white issue, and yes, there are other people who have strong feelings about it. Just because it’s a non-issue for you does not mean the argument is therefore closed.
Example: Your family are strangers to me, I have no feelings for them, if they all died in a car crash tomorrow it wouldn’t matter one bit. But it might matter to you eh? Do you see how that works? One person’s nonchalance does not invalidate how others are affected by a particular issue.
Yet you still don’t explain why it matters to you. It’s not like the government is forcing you to get on an airplane. You could always take a car, train or boat.
If the purpose of these scans were anything but for security I could see how there might be a point to the discussion. But it’s not like TSA workers are beating off under the counter as people pass thru, or the ones doing pat downs are getting their jollies by doing so. I’m betting the guy that has to touch your junk when you decline the scanner doesn’t like it any better than you do.
It’s an unfounded and irrational response to something that should be a no-brainer, plain and simple.
I wonder, do you put up the same resistance when getting an x-ray, cat scan, or MRI? Cause y’know the tech could be pleasuring himself the whole time you’re in the machine, right?
Some people just aren’t happy unless they’ve got something to bitch and moan about.
“Yet you still don’t explain why it matters to you. It’s not like the government is forcing you to get on an airplane. You could always take a car, train or boat.”
Yet another American who doesn’t leave his home and has no idea about distance, I see. I fly across the coasts. I can not drive for 2+ weeks every time I have business. The people who fly the least dictate these idiotic policies for the people who fly the most.
No, you DON’T see. I travel quite frequently. And my only goal while traveling is to get where I need to go in one piece and with as little stress and drama as possible. The scanner simply does not faze me in the least. I DO NOT CARE. I’m mature enough to not be worried nor concerned about the outline of my shlong being shown for a few seconds on a monitor in glorious ghostly B&W.
My statement was to say you always have a choice. If the scanners bother you that much then find an alternative method of travel. If that’s not realistic you better learn how to deal with it cause it’s unlikely they’re going away any time soon.
Y’know, sometimes I hate being the voice of reason, but dammit, someone has to do it.
Well, that’s great for you. I unfortunately also have to travel for work distances that are not possible to drive given I usually must be to my destination in short order (if not the same day). These scanners may have safety risks long term (especially for frequent flyers), and until these things are proven safe (over years of testing), I’m just not comfortable with it. Honestly, I’d rather have someone manhandle my junk rather than get skin cancer, but given a *real* choice I’d say I’d prefer less security theater and more security (although I suppose that’s probably a pipe dream).
Also, what is really to stop this from happening again?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1330327/Airport-security-breach-naked-body-scanner-images-leaked-online.html?ito=feeds-newsxml
Also, what is really to stop this from happening again?
The fact that we are talking about the TSA, and the arrticle you linked to is the US Marshalls scanning people for a test program at a Federal Courthouse? And they weren;t leaked, they were obtained through a FOIA request. That article title is titled that way to get idiots to click on it who won;t read the article, but instead parrot what they think it said.
The point is, the images *are* stored on the machines. They *could* be leaked. And we’re trusting the equivalent of the airport DMV to keep this sort of thing safe – they don’t follow any of their other procedures properly, so what’s to stop them from violating one that says they won’t save the pic and post it somewhere?
The point is, the machines *can* store images, and apparently it’s not hard to get the files off either.
“Not flying” is not the voice of reason. I hate flying, I dont have to travel for work, but at multiple points in my life I have had to fly. There is no choice.
1) consider, for a moment, that children will be using these scanners. & the government will be retaining those photos. now consider that if those photos were retained on your computer, you’d be a felon. shouldn’t we hold our government to the same standards as its citizens? i know what you’re thinking – “please, the government isn’t a bunch of child rapists.” don’t be so sure about that (see point 2).
2) it’s not like TSA workers are beating off under the counter as people pass thru, or the ones doing pat downs are getting their jollies by doing so.
you so sure about that? “Child rape charge rocks TSA” – enjoy that.
http://www.bostonherald.com/news/regional/view.bg?articleid=1238602
3) no, the government isn’t forcing me onto an airplane, but they are forcing me to undergo a higher level of scrutiny to fly. i accept that, but i also expect a certain level of respect in my choice to fly. i don’t consider taking naked photos, retaining them & then lying about that retention respectful in the least.
4) the CAT/MRI isn’t a good comparison b/c you & your doctor(s) have a confidential relationship that is governed by law. you have no such relationship with airport security. furthermore, they are LICENSED & can be held accountable (civilly & criminally) for any improper handling of body scans. also consider that physicians (or even techs) have a considerable amount of time & money invested in their career whereas anyone who can pass a multiple choice test & a laughable background screen can become a TSA agent.
but the biggest reason i’m against these scanners? they’re expensive, they were deployed untested & some experts consider them completely ineffective ( http://boingboing.net/2010/01/22/naked-airport-scanne.html, http://consumerist.com/2010/04/post-1.html ). why are we spending millions of dollars on this crap? graft. that’s what this is all about – enriching a few political insiders with lush government contracts for overpriced crap.
1) No, what we should do is remove thought crime altogether and take all images, video clips, text, etc. off the contraband list.
Contraband items should be limited to counterfeit goods, illicit drugs, dangerous items, and other things that are bad for their physical properties (or infringement of copyright) instead of the thoughts or ideas they express, whether or not they are obscene.
Making more people subject to an absolutely ridiculous law, that makes it a crime to hold onto evidence of another crime (that is highly punished on its own, with long jail sentences and incredibly high amounts of social stigma) is moving in the wrong direction.
Once Google has facial recognition software, and reverse image search – combined with all the social networking sites out there – someone could find child pornography, scan the face, search Google, find the name of the kid (or the parents in a family photo online), and notify the police. Child abuse is already illegal; making evidence of the crime a further illegal act is retarded (though I think there is room for private rights of action against anyone who has their image or likeness sold against their consent, and that the Government should strictly forbid the sale of child pornography as a commercial incentive would create more of a market).
Furthermore, the naked pictures of kids standing straight up in down with their hands up will not be considered child pornography in a court of law.
“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.”
That is why it matters. All other points are moot. In any other setting, in order to be subjected to a search of this magnitude the Police must either have a warrant, or they must have reasonable cause to believe that you have just, or are about to, complete a crime.
The fact that these searches are carried out by untrained personnel who probably couldn’t find weapons that terrorists had hidden on them, even if they were there, is just adding further insult.
All the other arguments, while enlightening, are ultimately unimportant in the face of the constitution.
We can both guarantee our rights and guarantee our safety. There are other ways, more effective ways, of finding terrorists and those are the methods that everyone should be supporting. Not this ineffectual and illegal BS.
I don’t get an x-ray, an MRI, or a cat scan every time I go to the doctor, as a pre-curser to an otherwise regular appointment, “just in case.” X-rays are damaging to the human body and should only be done if necessary. Ask your doctor, he will tell you the same thing.
The purpose of these scans is NOT security. If it were, they would be effective at thwarting terrorist plots. As many people have said, NO successful plane attack, including the 9/11 hijackings, would have been prevented by the security measures now in place. The only thing that these ‘heightened security measures’ prevent are poorly planned attacks that already failed the first time.
The purpose of these scans is to justify enormous government expenditure based on corruption and lobbies.
If I were a parent of an dolescent … I would not want anyone to have this kind of image, of them:
http://www.adepost.com/2010/02/10/kindly-refuse-humiliating-invasions-of-our-privacy-airport-scanners/
I mean, seriously. A picture like that, of a fifteen year old of either gender? Would get anyone but the TSA people thrown in jail. Seriously.
So, why’s it okay suddenly, when it’s the government taking the picture?
That picture is a fake. Look at some of the other posts here. The dead giveaway is the pose. Who poses like that in an airport scanner?
And I submit that taking a scan of a teenager for airport security is no more lewd than getting an x-ray or CT scan that includes the pelvis or chest.
“…We ask for cooperation, patience and a commitment to vigilance in the face of a determined enemy.”
That’s the best description of the TSA I’ve ever heard from a government official.
The TSA is determined to get as many people as possible to stop flying. If no one is flying, then they don’t have to worry about terrorists.
“We are at war with Eurasia. We have always been at war with Eurasia”.
So enlighten me. Does ole Janet Napolitano have to go through these things, or any public official? I thought not.
Yes, she demonstrated the machine and you can find scans of her online.
ew
Link or it didn’t happen.
He’d provide one, but if you search Google for “backscatter images of Janet Napolitano” the image servers immediately self destruct which could alter the tilt of planet and send us head first into the worst ice age in history.
I thought that was the alternate scenario for Global Warming.
Demonstrating is not the same as being required to submit to the process under normal conditions. I highly doubt she stands in line with the rest of us unwashed masses when taking a flight.
Hubba hubba! O wow! Hot dog!!! Where’s the link? Where’s the link?
Indeed. If they’re so safe, clearly there’s no issue preventing them from being installed at every entrance to TSA headquarters. “What? You don’t want to be scanned just because you went outside for a cigarette? You gave up your rights when you started working here.”
Fuck, install them at all the entrances to congress and see how quick the congress-critters think they’re dangerous. I’d love to get the ones getting kickbacks through these things several times a week and see how they feel.
Yes, whenever they fly commercial. I’ve seen US Senators go through the same screening as everyone else.
I’m worried about the long-term effects of radiation from the backscatter-type scanners. The millimeter-wave ones, I’m less concerned about, but the TSA is being downright irresponsible with the backscatter ones.
The entire airport security screening system needs to be overhauled, reimagined, and reimplemented. I don’t feel any safer by the methodology in place, and the invasive nature of both the porno scanners and the grope-a-thon are unacceptable.
Apparently, you are in the minority. The vast swath of unwashed sheeple approve of the magic box that keeps them safe.
You see, people!? This is what we get for DRYING UP SCIENCE EDUCATION — most people DON’T KNOW ANYTHING about logic, reason, and how the physical world works!
You saw the wrong pictures. The ones you saw were not from the scanner that is being widely adopted. The Backscatter images are much more detailed than the earlier article that showed images from the other machine today. Have a look for yourself:
http://www.anonymoushints.com/2010/01/08/tsa-airport-body-scanners-see-under-clothes/
Sorry, this was a response to the first post. My bad.
How many times does it have to be explained that those pictures are fake? A thousand? A million?
http://trueslant.com/KashmirHill/2010/01/27/tsa-scanner-porn-hoax-fools-gizmodo-drudge-report/
I’m never going through one of them because they’re incredibly invasive, but please, for the love of god, know what you’re talking about first.
I apologize, I posted the real ones, no need to yell at me twice.
How many times does it have to be explained that those pictures are fake? A thousand? A million?
http://trueslant.com/KashmirHill/2010/01/27/tsa-scanner-porn-hoax-fools-gizmodo-drudge-report/
I’m never going through one of them because they’re incredibly invasive, but please, for the love of god, know what you’re talking about first.
My mistake, I posted the incorrect link. I fixed it and posted others. Even though the one woman image is fake, the others are not, and to be honest the female image that is fake is not very far off from the real ones.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1077800/Airport-admits-strip-search-body-scanners-WILL-people-naked.html
http://blogs.courant.com/rick_green/2010/07/backscatter-airport-screener-m.html
I don’t take any issue with being scanned to fly. BUT I do take issue with the expense that operating and maintaining these machines must incur. Who’s paying for that?
You, me, your children and your children’s children
The biggest problem of these machines is that they produce a lot of false positives, and then you get struck with the aggressive pat-down anyways. That’s the problem I have. Nate Silver on his 538 blog reported that the stitching on his jeans turned up a false positive.
Exactly what happened to me – I went through the scanner, and btw, they were very short with me throughout the process, and I was just nervous about it is all yet I was being talked to like I was a criminal… but i digress, I went through and then had to stand there in front of a lady who didn’t say a word to me, she just told me to stand there…. after about 20 seconds, she got a blip on her walkie talkie and they told her where exactly to pat me down.
So basically i got scanned and patted down…. on the front and back of the top of my jeans… they had a number of golden-y rivets on my right front pocket and i guess that looked like something to the guy in the booth….
it feels a lot more violating than I thought it would, that’s for sure.
Who in the hell did they poll? Sure, some people may be all for it until they actually have to go through one. Ask people how they feel about it as they’re walking up to the machine and forced to either go through it or be subjected to a very handsy pat down… or be taken to court and fined $10,000. I bet they’ll change their tune then.
Hey Janet, do tell us about all “the weapons and other dangerous and prohibited items we’ve found during AIT screenings………time and again” How many of them by backscatter x-ray?
Or do you just want to give the public false reassurance by claiming the weapons found by xrays of carry ons and checked luggage (also Advanced Imaging Technology, right?) have anything to do with the effectiveness or success of the new backscatter?
I have no reason to doubt that they found many “weapons” using the technology. I’m just guessing they’re mostly scissors, keychains, shampoo bottles, and the like. Kinda like the keychain swiss army knife (about an inch long) they confiscated from my wife a couple months ago. I’m not sure you could threaten anyone with that “weapon”.
On the other hand, I would highly doubt any real weapons brought with evil intentions were caught. Why would anyone bother? Just blow up the people standing in line for their porno shoots.
9/11. Boxcutters. Weapons that small have worked.
You try that again with a boxcutter. Gaurenteed when the plane hits the ground, people with the box cutters will either be dead or in critical condition, and there will be a few passengers with some cuts, if they weren’t smart enough to wrap jackets/shirts around their arms/etc…
God Help You if Cade Courtley is flying coach.
They should inform them of the dangers of their use, and show what they look like in the scanner, and then repoll them.
I’d be for it if I knew there was a process that the information would be used as intended. Past articles like the workers who made fun of their co-workers small wee wee give me pause if they technology can be used with maturity. Or someone decides they found “something” near the groin or breasts area using the scanner to have an excuse to grope a person to get their rocks off.
Everyone should opt out…opt out…opt out! The line has got to be drawn somewhere, before we’re required to show up to the airport in nothing but see through underwear and unpack our entire bag onto a conveyor belt.
IN THE MORNING!
Slippery slope fallacy.
Please revise your argument.
“Slippery slope fallacy.”
Is that what public schools taught you? That if you can imagine any argument into any of the argument “fallacies” that the argument loses all of its merit?
Whatever happened to critical thinking?
How is being naked not the next step beyond appearing to be naked behind an x-ray machine? They could easily have us strip behind a curtain, walk ten paces in front of an inspector, and dress at the other end – it would be faster and cheaper that the x-ray.
I didn’t invent it into a fallacy. The poster gave the argument that body scanners should not be used, and their reasoning was that if not, we will be forced to come to airports naked. Where is the support to the poster’s claims? Others have provided reasoning behind their decisions to like or hate the scanners. This person should too.
How is arriving at the air port naked NOT the next step in going behind an x-ray at the airport (which was the earlier poster’s comment) or physically stripping once in the security line? Well, first it is important to remember that there doesn’t necessarily have to be a next step. If the scanners work, the TSA will just use them as they are now. If they don’t, it is possible for the TSA to find another way to keep unwanted items off planes. The direction of this change doesn’t need to be in the direction towards public indecency, but could take a similar form of other (more successful) plane security measures from around the globe.
Also, I just wanted to comment that your response to me was rather rude. I attacked the poster’s argument. Your statements at public schooling and critical thinking seemed less about fighting what I had said, and more about attacking my education. Please try to focus on attacking the content of someone’s argument rather than lowering yourself to childish behavior. If your argument is truly valid and good, it doesn’t need that crap around it.
Not too good with patterns, eh? It’s not a fallacy to suggest that a pattern has emerged of asking for an inch and taking a mile in terms of airline security. Is it a jump to say that at some point in the future (I never did say “next”) we will be required to do such things in the name of security? Possibly, but I do have a historical pattern on my side, making it at the very least an educated hypothesis.
I was planning on showing up to the airport wearing nothing but a thong speedo.
Either that, or I was going to attach aluminum foil to every part of my body with rubber cement; fill my underwear and socks with washers and ball bearings; and glue iron filings into my hair.
We expect video when you do. This I would like to see!
That’s because the vast majority of Americans are sheep that do not think for themselves and merely believe what is fed to them. They actually believe “Security Theater” does something. If they all knew they were having their families’ privates groped and nude photos taken by the government for absolutely no reason, they would have a different opinion completely.
Any time I see a post about the scanners, there are about 50% of the people that make a statement like “if it makes me safer while flying, I have NO problem with it!” That’s the problem bud, it makes you absolutely no safer. If you want to be safe, you will have to have deep x-ray scans taken that completey map/penetrate the body, and we all know that isn’t safe for frequent fliers. I’m sure they would respond: “Well, if it prevents me from being blown up by terrorists, I don’t mind a little cancer.”
Look up the scans of Janet herself. You can make out astounding detail, like the specific size and shape of her breasts (and which one is larger than the other), the shape of her body, everything. On a dude you can totally make out the penis and balls.
And from those FOIA-released shots from Florida, the scan image is coupled with a real picture of the person standing in the machine. Some of you are saying this isn’t intrusive? That they can mail or store a picture of you clothed next to a picture of you through this machine? And BTW, you can invert the colors on the picture for a real good view…
and the shots from Florida were from a courthouse and a different agency than the TSA. It was part of a test, which would explain why it was set up that way.
Actually, if you look at the scans of Janet you can make out the penis and balls.
Janet never would and never will go through one of those machines
I don’t care if they strip me down and make me lift and pull every part of my body…as long as everyone else is doing it. Would make me feel a lot better about flying.
“I don’t care if they strip me down and make me lift and pull every part of my body…as long as everyone else is doing it. Would make me feel a lot better about flying.”
Bend over, buddy. They need to make a line for the people who are happy to get groped and fingered by strangers in public, also who are happy to send their children to that fate.
You’re not going to be one bit safer getting strip searched. It’s sad that you think you’re safer with these disgusting machines and pat-down procedures. Enjoy life in a police state, fascist.
“feel safer” is the key. But it may have nothing at all to do with actual safety. If they were scanning and sniffing all the cargo, now that would be an actual improvement.
I’ll shatter your safe happy feeling for you. The new “naked scanners” do not penetrate into the body, therefore, any article that a terrorist or other bad person wanted to smuggle on the plane would simply need to be hidden in a body cavity. If you are talking about a bomb utilized by a suicide bomber, I would imagine it would be extremely easy to hide a couple pounds of explosives in a body cavity with a remote detonator in a liquid tight container. A setup like this would be virtually undectable through a body scan or pat down.
The TSA keeps saying that the underwear bomber would have been caught with their new scanners or by a pat down, but we have not seen any evidence to confirm this.
What do I think? I think the terrorist have won.
Winner
indeed
FTW
Fuckin A right man.
And they’ve gotten our own government to do the terrorizing for us.
A determined enemy indeed…
If the TSA “officers” were well trained, trustworthy and professional security personals who dedicate protecting us, it may be OK.
Nate Silver has a good writeup on why these polls, especially when they include “all Americans” are bullshit. The tl;dr is basically that very few Americans fly, and even fewer fly regularly, so of course you’re going to say you approve if you never actually have to deal with it.
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/15/the-full-body-backlash/
The question as to whether or not the scans are invasive is answered by agents keeping copies of them.
The poll is faulty. The question was:
“Some airports are now using “full-body” digital x-ray machines to electronically screen passengers in airport security lines. Do you think these new x-ray machines should or should not be used at airports?”
I truly believe the question was designed to make people think of x-ray images, not the naked backscatter images. Frankly, not everyone knows the details of these machine, even people on here. If had never seen an example of the scan and heard this question, I’d be for it also.
Per http://www.tsa.gov/approach/tech/ait/faqs.shtm, “The image cannot be stored, transmitted or printed, and is deleted immediately once viewed. Additionally, there is a privacy algorithm applied to blur the image.” Incompetano said something similar in her USA Today piece.
More lies. Anything deleted must have been stored, yes? If not transmitted, how does the assigned viewer see it? Does the privacy algorithm hid faces (good: hides celebs; bad: hides facial expressions at a key moment), or merely junk, which would make it ineffective by hiding the area where the Christmas bomber secreted PETN?
Anything deleted must be stored, no. There is a thing known as a buffer. I have a TV that has a “freeze frame” button that literally freezes the frame on the screen. But that is it. It’s not stored, as it’s not a DVR, I can’t download it, and I can’t see anything else until I unfreeze it. These are the same thing. The buffer is constantly refilled, and if you turn the machine off, the buffer disappears.
It’s not transmitted, it’s relayed. There is a closed circuit that has a direct line from the machine to the viewing device.
And why would hiding faces be bad? There is a reason that there are people AT the machine watching you during your “key moment”. It’s not the guy who watches the monitors job to observe you, they are focused on the scan. It’s the people who are looking at you who are watching your body language.
Putting something in a buffer is storing it, albeit temporarily.
They’ve already disproven the lie “images can’t/won’t be stored”. There were thousands of images taken of airport employees and fliers.
“if you turn the machine off, the buffer disappears. “
The machines are designed to store pictures and do store pictures. The buffer is written to file.
I think the poll question is misleading:”Some airports are now using ‘full-body’ digital x-ray machines to electronically screen passengers in airport security lines. Do you think these new x-ray machines should or should not be used at airports?”
I would imagine the term “x-ray” implies (for most people) that the machine displays a picture of your bones and any hard materials in/on your person. I think most people would indeed be comfortable with this idea. If the question had been more specific, perhaps “…using machines which display passengers’ naked bodies…” the responses would be different.
There’s a problem with the poll’s wording – without background information it’s easy to conflate your standard beep-when-you’re-wearing-a-metal-belt-buckle x-ray machines with “full-body x-ray machines”. Introductory questions are necessary to separate people who have heard about the NEW machines from the people who assume there’s no difference.
The “beep due to belt buckle” is a metal detector…not an x-ray. An Xray would be what they put your luggage through, and these machines are x-ray machines.
No offense, but the last time I had to fly you drag all your crap to the airport amazingly nothing was lost. Then you sit in the tube all uncomfortably with people all around you that you don’t know. I have never been that scared of being in a crash, but now between the pat downs or the scanners I have to say I think unless I am going across the country or overseas which most of my family live in Europe I am not going to make the journey. Forget it. I hate the whole experience anyway, and this just makes it suck worse. I don’t want anyone feeling me up, or doing anymore scans on me.
How’s that old saying go? 75% of the statistics you see are made up?
How’s that old saying go? 75% of the statistics you see are made up?
Whoa, I’m repeating myself =/
“There are three kinds of lie: Lies, Damned Lies, and Statistics.”
I bet the polling results would be different if the polled people right after they came out of the security fondling, er, I mean, screening.
Those images are not naked.
The ones you seen online can easily be faked from any photo editor.
If people get turned on by these body scans, they have other problems then.
“If people get turned on by these body scans, they have other problems then.”
Ir-fucking-relevant. You don’t have to imagine that the people in another room who are archiving naked pictures of you (which are more accurate than you claim) are jerking off to be bothered by this.
It’s sad that a great TV hero like Macgyver has become an authoritarian pig.
I bet he’s back to using guns as something other than a wrench and eating meat as well.
First off, there are two kinds of scanners. The millimeter-wave ones are the ones that are much blurrier. The backscatter x-ray machines are the ones where TSA is getting a very clear glimpse of your privates.
My problem with the use of the backscatter x-ray machines is that the alternative to them is an “enhanced” pat down, which involves the TSA agent using fingers and palms everywhere, including your crotch and chest. This is HIGHLY invasive, and for a lot of sexual assault suvivors, myself included, it is absolutely not an acceptable alternative to the backscatter machines (essentially, TSA is telling me that I have to go through the backscatter machines or I’ll get to relive my assault).
I also question the effectiveness of either type of scanner to prevent terrorism. When the body scanner issue first came up months ago, the head of airline security in Israel pointed out that they don’t use such scanners, and they manage just fine.
Either way, I think the poll saying most Americans “love” the scanners is total bull.
As a fellow survivor, I couldn’t agree more. And I make no guarantees about not having a severe and violent PTSD flashback if a TSA goon touches my kid.
I would like to see a poll that people are shown examples of images from backscatter machines, then asked if they approve of them. Or better yet, poll some people right after they are shown an image of themselves from one of these machines.
CBS has a history of questionable reportage so I’ll take their poll with a grain of salt. According to my own observations and informal surveys with my friends and co-workers, these full-body scanners are very unpopular, highly invasive, and probably illegal.
We all know these expensive “safety precaution” band-aids will do absolutely nothing to deter international terrorism.
In summary, these machines are a complete waste of everybody’s time, money, and resources, and will only further exacerbate “air rage” problems as average law-abiding citizens are treated like criminals, and the terrorists snicker and laugh as we bankrupt ourselves.Good job, TSA, the terrorists win again.
as much as we hate or love these machines, the little people don’t have a lot of lobbying power. and no CBS poll is going to make the government change their mind.
my thought is to complain to the airline of which you might be a miles/club member. enough people tell the airline about the direct loss of business this will incur and THEY will lobby for the discontinuation.
if you are hot… you shouldn’t care if people see it… if you are ugly, than nobody wants to see it. get over yourself and take one for the good ole USA.
Your chances of being killed by terrorists are roughly the same as winning powerball.
The point is that I only want one person in my life to see me naked, and it is DEFINITELY not a stranger in the Airport.
Right, because if we’re attractive, we shouldn’t have to care about protecting our self-image, despite the very fact that being attractive would give cause for people to exploit this system further…
Someone needs to make a video parody of the SNL skit and call it “Jizzed in your hand” re: the new TSA groping policies.
CBS making up facts…. wouldn’t be the first time.
JHU APL is a government shill
Let’s try an experiment here, let me reword a quote from the summary above:
“Eighty-one percent of whites think airports should have separate facilities for blacks — including a majority of both men and women, Americans of all age groups, and Democrats, Republicans, and independents alike. Fifteen percent said airports should not discriminate base don race. “
It’s called Tyranny of the Majority folks, and our Republic was set up to prevent that sort of abuse. Just because most people feel a certain way doesn’t make it right. Am I using a bit of hyperbole by comparing this to the civil rights struggle 50 years ago? Yes, however the underlying point is the same even if the scale of the abuses is different. Getting 81 out of 100 people to say the sun revolves around the Earth doesn’t make that the right answer.
So does this mean I don’t have to take off my shoes, belt, and everything else anymore? Or now do I have to get scanned so they can see me totally nekid?!
No…just drop your pants and assume the position.
(snaps rubber glove) Won’t hurt a bit!
I have a poll that indicates I’m the world’s greatest dad. Admittedly, my sample size is rather small, but, hey, it’s totally legit.
I’ve flown somewhere less than 5 times in my entire 45 year life, and I DO NOT approve of these scanners.
I fly ALL the time and have NO problem with whatever procedures, machines, etc that are in use to detect for bombs, terrorists or whatever. I certainly would NOT like to be blown up. And unless you fly ALL the time, you probably don’t understand my mentality about this.
Do you realize that the last three foiled airline bombing attempts ALL made it through security? That the procedures in place completely failed to detect and stop the threat and it was basically a bit of luck and the incompetence of the terrorists that allowed them to be stopped?
1. The shoe bomber? Caught by passengers IN FLIGHT while trying to light his shoe-bombs.
2. The Underpants bomber? Again, caught IN FLIGHT while trying to chemically ignite his device.
3. The most recent ink toner cartridge bombs? Also made it through security, were actually pulled by security officers and scanned during the investigation, came back clean, and finally had to be completely opened to reveal the bomb contents.
The current security theater you put so much faith in is only stopping yesterday’s problems. It’s a farce, there is no innovation, there is no foolproof scanning. You are being made to submit to foolish, wasteful practices that do not fulfill their intended mission until after the fact.
Right.. because with all this security, it would never occur to a terrorist that those long lines at the airport are much easier targets..
“And unless you fly ALL the time, you probably don’t understand my mentality about this.”
PILOTS’ UNIONS in the US and UK disagree with you, let alone all the European countries that have banned these devices. The more you fly, the greater your cancer risk by these unregulated, uncalibrated “medical” devices.
You can rationalize your cowardice, but plenty of people who fly more than you know better.
I walk a LOT, and there are often people around me when I do. There are a lot of people stabbed and shot in this country every day. I would be much more comfortable if everybody had to go through a metal detector upon leaving their house.
We can certainly thank Chertoff for these. He’s a lobbyist now pushing these body scanners.
“Prefer to alternative methods”, which means it’s not so much they like them, they just like them better than having their balls fondled.
I fly ALL the time and have NO problem with whatever procedures, machines, etc that are in use to detect for bombs, terrorists or whatever. I certainly would NOT like to be blown up. And unless you fly ALL the time, you probably don’t understand my mentality about this.
Yes, but these methods are ineffective. Wouldn’t you rather that the TSA spend money on tactics that are proven to actually stop terrorists then on this show that does nothing?
Enjoy your police state, fascist. You’re not a lick safer with these machines over metal detectors.
This sounds like an Inverse Fallacy of Accidents.
Because You’ve never had problems with the TSA, does not necessarily lead to the conclusion that nobody has problems with the TSA.
This is the real problem with airport security in general — the lowest common denominator is whichever airport has the least security. Sure, airports in the U.S. can have lots of security in place, but it doesn’t help if someone flying into the U.S. from an international airport outside of this country ends up here.