Who’s Getting Rich From the Naked Full-Body Scanner Boom?

From Alternet:

The TSA has a dismal record of enriching private corporations with failed technologies. Will the “digital strip search” device just bring more of the same?

Scan, baby, scan. That’s the mantra among politicians at all levels in the wake of the thwarted terrorist attack aboard a Detroit-bound passenger jet. According to conventional wisdom, the would-be “underwear bomber” could have been stopped by airport security if he’d been put through a full-body scanner, which would have revealed the cache of explosives attached to Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab’s groin.

Within days or even hours of the bombing attempt, everyone was talking about so-called whole-body imaging as the magic bullet that could stop this type of attack. In announcing hearings by the Senate Homeland Security Commitee, Joe Lieberman approached the use of scanners as a foregone conclusion, saying one of the “big, urgent questions that we are holding this hearing to answer” was “Why isn’t whole-body-scanning technology that can detect explosives in wider use?” Former Homeland Security chief Michael Chertoff told the Washington Post, “You’ve got to find some way of detecting things in parts of the body that aren’t easy to get at. It’s either pat downs or imaging, or otherwise hoping that bad guys haven’t figured it out, and I guess bad guys have figured it out.”

Since the alternative is being groped by airport screeners, the scanners might sound pretty good. The Transportation Security Administration has claimed that the images “are friendly enough to post in a preschool,” though the pictures themselves tell another story, and numerous organizations have opposed them as a gross invasion of privacy. Beyond privacy issues, however, are questions about whether these machines really work — and about who stands to benefit most from their use. When it comes to high-tech screening methods, the TSA has a dismal record of enriching private corporations with failed technologies, and there are signs that the latest miracle device may just bring more of the same.

[Read more at Alternet]

, , , , ,

  • Diogenes

    great question but why did you stop just after you asked it? Where’s the research? Who makes the scanners? How long have they been in business? Who runs those businesses? Are they a subsidiary company? Are the executives ex-politicians? Unless you can begin to answer those questions this isn’t journalism, it’s yellow fear-mongering. I could be just as sinister and ask “who’s getting rich off Disinformation.com’s anti-establishment agenda?” The statement is loaded to make you look bad and make people question your motives and the motives of all your readers. Frankly, it’s not a fair question. In fact, I believe it qualifies as begging the question. I like what you do here, but this type of post doesn’t help, it makes people dumber by asking them not to think critically and telling them (subvertly) who to criticize. You’re better than that. You’re better than them.

  • Diogenes

    great question but why did you stop just after you asked it? Where's the research? Who makes the scanners? How long have they been in business? Who runs those businesses? Are they a subsidiary company? Are the executives ex-politicians? Unless you can begin to answer those questions this isn't journalism, it's yellow fear-mongering. I could be just as sinister and ask “who's getting rich off Disinformation.com's anti-establishment agenda?” The statement is loaded to make you look bad and make people question your motives and the motives of all your readers. Frankly, it's not a fair question. In fact, I believe it qualifies as begging the question. I like what you do here, but this type of post doesn't help, it makes people dumber by asking them not to think critically and telling them (subvertly) who to criticize. You're better than that. You're better than them.