The
Washington Post has become the latest corporate media outlet
to advertise for mass implementation of naked body scanners
in all U.S. airports following the failed Christmas day plane
bomb attempt.
"Ever Since Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab allegedly tried
to blow up Northwest Flight 253 with explosives in his underwear,
a debate has begun anew over the use and usefulness of full-body
scanning technology that would have detected his secret cargo,"
The editorial states, failing to mention the fact that according
to designers of the body imaging machines, they
would NOT have detected his secret cargo.
"The privacy concerns raised by these machines are understandable.
But the precautions taken at every step to guard passenger privacy
should allay any fears." the editorial states, as it alleges
that all images produced by the scanners are fuzzy and blurred,
a claim clearly contradicted by readily available examples that
show high quality detail of naked male and female bodies.
The piece also claims that the ability of the machines to store,
transmit or print images is disabled when they are delivered
to airports.
"Considering Mr. Abdulmutallab's success at getting a
concealed explosive aboard an aircraft, thought must be given
to making full-body scans a mandatory and primary security screen."
the Post piece continues, without highlighting the safety issues
concerning the firing of ionizing radiation at the body, which
effectively "unzips" DNA, according to scientific
research by the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology.
One would be forgiven for thinking that the writers of the
editorial were on the same payroll as
former Homeland Security head Michael Chertoff,
such is the eagerness of the piece to sell the machines.
"You don't have to look at my wife and 8-year-old daughter
naked to secure an airplane," Chaffetz said at the time.
"You can actually see the sweat on somebody's back. You
can tell the difference between a dime and a nickel. If they
can do that, they can see things that quite frankly I don't
think they should be looking at in order to secure a plane,"
Chaffetz told the House.
"The Chaffetz amendment has yet to pass the Senate --
and it shouldn't." The Washington Post assertively concludes.
The Post joins scores of other corporate media sources in it's
unreserved praise of the body scanners. In a Globe
and Mail article published this week, University
of Ottawa professor Mark Salter gushes
over the virtual strip searches, concocting a bizarre
twist of logic argument that the machines actually increase
privacy. This viewpoint flies
in the face of that of surveillance experts who
note that the scanners will do nothing to make air travel safer.
Of course, we shouldn't be surprised given that the vast majority
of the corporate media is owned wholesale by the very military-industrial
complex set to land huge profits from the sale
of thousands of the naked imaging scanners.
As we have previously documented, the plan to implement the
scanners on a mass scale was in the works before the Christmas
day incident. In October last year the TSA
announced plans to expand the passenger electronic
strip search program. In November, The
Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) filed
a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit challenging the Department
of Homeland Security's failure to make public details about
the agency's Whole Body Imaging program. On December 17, just
one week before the failed bombing, EPIC also filed a lawsuit
against the Department of Justice concerning the use of the
screening devices.
The
Washington Post has become the latest corporate media outlet
to advertise for mass implementation of naked body scanners
in all U.S. airports following the failed Christmas day plane
bomb attempt.
