Doublethink (Part 6)

“On each landing, opposite the lift-shaft, the poster with the enormous face gazed from the wall. It was one of those pictures which are so contrived that the eyes follow you about when you move. BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU, the caption beneath it ran.”  

Nineteen Eighty-Four  Part 1 Chapter 1, p. 5 by George Orwell.[1]

Millimeter wave body scanner images

“One by one they passed in front of me, teachers, friends, others, all those I had been afraid of, all those I once could have laughed at, all those I had lived with over the years.  They went by, fallen, dragging their packs, dragging their lives, deserting their homes, the years of their childhood, cringing like beaten dogs.

“They passed without a glance in my direction…

“‘When is our turn coming?’ I asked my father.”

Elie Wiesel describes the move of his Hungarian neighbors from a Jewish ghetto to a Nazi death camp in 1944.[2]

Our Turn Is Coming

During the Bush (R) administration we heard a lot about the prisoners at Guantanamo.  During the Obama (D) administration we hear little about overseas renderings of Islamic persons and the assassination of US citizens—they’re labeled Moslem fanatics, so it’s ok.  Most Americans today are preoccupied with Obamacare, home foreclosures, and their next paycheck, and don’t pay much attention.

The National Security Agency (NSA) goes overboard with warrantless searches, but most Americans rationalize that they’ve got nothing to hide and ignore the stories.  Besides, we have a Constitutional Law Professor for President and he agrees with the policy.  Three days after assuming office in 2009:

“The Obama administration fell in line with the Bush administration Thursday when it urged a federal judge to set aside a ruling in a closely watched spy case weighing whether a U.S. president may bypass Congress and establish a program of eavesdropping on Americans without warrants.”[3]

Something most Americans can’t ignore as easily are the intrusions of the Transportation Safety Administration (TSA), the bureaucracy created in a knee jerk response to the 9/11 blowback of 2001.

By mid-September 2004, during the Bush administration, the TSA put in place a policy of “physical frisking” of selected airline passengers before they boarded an airplane.  Immediately after the policy change there were complaints by women who had been “physically frisked” at the airport:

• Singer and actress Patty Lupone described an airline security screener who demanded that LuPone remove her shirt. After protesting, LuPone complied, “revealing a thin, see-through camisole.”  According to Lupone, the screener "was all over me with her hands," touching areas including her groin and breasts.
• Advertising executive Lu Chekowsky said, "routinely, my breasts are being cupped, my behind is being felt."
• “Nancy Jackson, president of a global company in New York that sells interior finishes…has also learned not to express her objections.  ‘If you do,’ she said, ‘They really feel you up, and then check every section of your wallet and every item in your carry-on, including your makeup and toiletries; it's disgusting.’"[4]

Backscatter X-ray Body Scanner Images

TSA Advanced Imaging Technology (AIT) Program

By 2007 the TSA introduced two types of Advanced Imaging Technology (AIT) airport body scanners at Phoenix Sky Harbor airport to use as a secondary screen on passengers arbitrarily selected for secondary screening: X-ray backscatter scanners and millimeter wave scanners.[5][6]  X-ray backscatter scanners use low-energy X-rays to snoop beneath passengers' clothing.  Millimeter wave scanners  produces images using radio waves, not X-rays.  A smiling TSA bureaucrat demonstrated the backscatter scanner and the virtues of a full body scan: no more groping frisks as the TSA keeps us all “safe.”

On Christmas Day 2009, after the "underwear bomber" intelligence failure, the Obama administration accelerated the deployment of new airport scanners to look beneath travelers' clothes to spot weapons or explosives.  A $215 million proposal by the Obama administration called for the purchase of 500 more machines in addition to the 450 already purchased.[7]  Half of the machines would be X-ray backscatter scanners and the other half would be millimeter wave scanners.

According to TSA plans, by late 2011, nearly 1000 body scanners will be looking under airline passengers' clothing in nearly half of US airport checkpoints.  Across the US, two out of every three passengers will be “asked” to step into one of the new machines for a six-second head-to-toe scan before boarding.

Safety Concerns about X-ray Backscatter Scanners

Most Americans willingly walk through airport scanners, trusting that the federal government has their best interests at heart.  Most air travelers don’t ask about safety and what testing has been done on the scanners—they trust Big Brother.  The state wouldn’t knowingly hurt civilians would it?[8]   

As body scanner usage becomes widespread at airport and public facilities, scientists at Columbia University question whether the risks of skin cancer have been adequately studied.  Scientists at the University of California also questioned “the extent to which the safety of this scanning device has been adequately demonstrated.”  They called for more study of the X-ray body scanners in an April 6, 2010 "Letter of Concern" (pdf) to John Holdren, the president's science adviser:

"The majority of their energy is delivered to the skin and the underlying tissue. Thus, while the dose would be safe if it were distributed throughout the volume of the entire body, the dose to the skin may be dangerously high.”[10]

The UC letter asked for a more thorough look at the risks of exposing millions of people to X-ray body scanners, and listed concerns about x-ray testing:

• increased risks to people over 65
• increased risks to fraction of females more likely to develop breast cancer
• increased risk for sperm mutagenesis
• increased risk of cancer to immune-compromised individuals
• risk to unborn when scanning pregnant women
• risk of radiation emission to children and adolescents
• unknown effects of the radiation on the cornea and thymus
• potential for equipment malfunction delivering increased radiation doses.

Don’t worry, Big Brother says the X-ray body scanners are safe: it meets the guidelines of the American National Standards Institute for the amount of radiation emitted.  What Big Brother doesn’t tell you:

“…guess who was on the committee that developed the guidelines for the X-ray scanners? Representatives from the companies that make the machines and the Department of Homeland Security, among others. In other words, the machines passed a test developed, in part, by the companies that manufacture them and the government agency that wants to use them.”[11]

Who Watches the Watchers?

“Millimeter wave uses electromagnetic waves to generate an image based on the energy reflected from the body. It passes harmless electromagnetic waves over the human body to create a robotic image...

“Passenger privacy is ensured through the anonymity of the image: The officer attending the passenger will not view the image, and as an additional precaution, the officer viewing the image will be remotely located and the image won't be stored, transmitted or printed, and deleted immediately once viewed. In fact, the machines have zero storage capability.”  TSA press release November 14, 2008[12]  

According to TSA pronouncements to the public, millimeter wave body scanners make unrecognizable “robotic images” of travelers.  According to the TSA, your privacy is protected because:

1. The “robotic images” aren’t recognizable because of a privacy filter.  The TSA doesn’t tell the public that they can change the settings of the privacy filter, but the TSA wouldn’t change the settings to show more detail would it?
2. And if the images were recognizable—which they aren’t of course, because the privacy filter makes them “robotic images,” and the TSA wouldn’t change the privacy filter settings—the TSA officer looking at them won’t be in the same room to see the person scanned.
3. And if the images were recognizable—which they aren’t because the TSA wouldn’t change the privacy filter settings after they demonstrated how “robotic” the image is to the news media—the image can’t be stored. 
4. And if the images were recognizable and stored—both of which, according to public announcements by the TSA, cannot happen—it’s only on one machine, and it’s a “robotic image”—the machines aren’t networked, so the images can’t be transmitted.
5. And if the images were recognizable, stored, and networked—which of course they aren’t and can’t be—remember, it’s only a “robotic image” because of the privacy filter.

Thus “passenger privacy is ensured” by the TSA.

At least that’s what the TSA wants you to think.  They want you to ignore the evidence that body scans are “virtual strip-searches” as AIT scanners record full-frontal nudity (video).  Introduction of the scanners in Great Britain raised concerns that the scanners violated child pornography laws there by making images of naked children.[13]

In America, Big Brother lies about privacy concerns to willing double-thinkers.  Introducing the AIT scanners at JFK airport on October 21, 2010, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano declined to demonstrate a “robotic image” of her package in one of the devices, and you can be sure she wasn’t frisked either.  That didn’t stop her from chanting the TSA litany for all the robots who would be stepping through the machines:

"Those who read the images are not actually physically at the gate, so they cannot associate an image with an individual person at all…

"And the machines are set so that no image is retained."[14]

In the Daily News video embedded with the online article about Napolitano at JFK, TSA Assistant Administrator for Security Operations Lee Kair regurgitated the other part of the TSA litany by noting that the image is “more like a chalk etching, not like a photograph,” because of the privacy filters built in to the scanner.

The TSA has repeatedly claimed that the scanners are incapable of storing or transmitting the naked images of scanned travelers.  The TSA website on Advanced Imaging Technology (AIT) states:

“Advanced imaging technology cannot store, print, transmit or save the image, and the image is automatically deleted from the system after it is cleared by the remotely located security officer.” 

Why would an image need to be “automatically deleted” from the system if the system can’t store the image?

What the TSA Doesn’t Tell You

According to TSA public announcements, the millimeter wave body scanners create a “robotic image” and have zero storage capability for that image.  The US Marshall service uses the same device and admits it stored 35,000 images on a body scanner used at a Florida courthouse checkpoint.[15]  A letter from the TSA to the Congressional chairman of the Committee on Homeland Security also contradicts the “zero storage capability” public statement:

“AIT has the ability to store and transmit data; however, the only locations where the functionalities of storage and data transmission are enabled are at the testing and development sites: TSIF, TSL, and TML.” - February 24, 2010 letter (pdf)  from the Acting Administrator of the TSA to the Congressional chairman of the Committee on Homeland Security.

Page 5 of the 70-page TSA procurement specification (pdf) for the scanners states that the scanner must "allow exporting of image data in real time" and provide a mechanism for "high-speed transfer of image data (raw and reconstructed)" over the network.

Page 5 of the specification (pdf) also states that the scanners shall have “a means to multiplex images, allowing up to 64 IOCPs (Image Operator Control Panels) to receive images from up to 64 WBI (Whole Body Imager) systems utilizing the network requirements set forth in section 3.1.1.3.6.”  Section 3.1.1.3.6 is titled “Network Interface.”  Does any of that sound like the scanners can be networked to you?

Page 5 of the specification (pdf) also says that the scanner will have "image filters to protect the identity, modesty, and privacy of the passenger."  These filters create the “robotic image” or the “chalklike etchings.”  The specification also states that “Enabling and disabling of image filtering shall be modifiable.”  Why does the TSA tell the public about the privacy filter, but neglect to mention they can change it?

But don’t worry about all of those details.  They’re Big Brother’s concern.  What the TSA wants you to remember is:

“…all full-body scanners have ‘strong privacy protections in place’ and are delivered to airports ‘without the capability to store, print or transmit images.’"  Anonymous TSA official[16]

What they do not want you to notice is that Janet Napolitano wouldn’t step into one of the new AIT scanners to demonstrate it.

The US Constitution Doesn’t Apply

Worried about your 4th Amendment protections from unreasonable search and seizures?  Relax, according to the Big Brother there’s no need to concern yourself.  The federal government maintains that body scanning is perfectly constitutional:

“Such searches are prophylactic in nature and designed to advance the vital goal of protecting the public, rather than being focused on criminal law enforcement and directed at apprehending specific suspects; they do not require either a warrant or individualized suspicion.” – Pp. 5-6 of DOJ response (pdf) to a case brought against TSA by the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC).[17]

According to Big Brother, your 4th Amendment protections don’t apply.  The TSA is searching everyone indiscriminately—"prophylactically.”  If they violate everyone’s rights, they’re not discriminating.  It’s ok!  And don’t forget, the TSA performs a “crucial function”:

"The program is designed to respect individual sensibilities regarding privacy, modesty and personal autonomy to the maximum extent possible, while still performing its crucial function of protecting all members of the public from potentially catastrophic events." – P. 9 of DOJ response (pdf) to a case brought against TSA by the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC).

To further reassure yourself, keep in mind that the “TSA respects the fundamental values of individual autonomy and privacy” and will “allow” you to have your crotch groped by a TSA official if you don’t want to walk through a body scanner when asked:

“Furthermore, TSA respects the fundamental values of individual autonomy and privacy by allowing individuals to request an alternative method of screening (a pat down search) if they choose to do so, and by ensuring – contrary to petitioners’ assertion – that AIT images will not be stored, transmitted or otherwise misused.” – P. 6 of DOJ response (pdf) to a case brought against TSA by the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC).

What are the watchers up to while they’re watching over you?  Among other things, they’re robbing you as they rifle your luggage, ogling you if you have large breasts or a small penis, and otherwise sexually and physically harassing you.[18]

But Big Brother wants to put your mind at ease.  The TSA is keeping you safe from all of those terrorists who hate your freedoms.

Freedom is Slavery

Some people, insufficiently cowed, refuse to be virtually strip-searched.  Some “voluntarily comply” by “choosing to be frisked,” so the TSA has responded with a new palms-down policy for frisking to discourage anyone from refusing a body scan before boarding an airplane.

One victim of the groping described it this way:

“It was extremely invasive. This was a very probing-type touching - not just patting over all your areas, but actually probing and pushing and seeing if I was concealing something in my genital area.”[19]

Now air travelers can “freely choose” to stand in front of X-ray backscatter scanners of questionable safety, or millimeter wave scanners to be virtually strip searched, or instead have their privates fondled with the new palms-down frisking policy, all in the name of keeping us safe.

The state prosecutes sexual assaults by subway gropers and peeping toms for violating the rights of individuals.  But we’re supposed to thank the state as it sexually assaults air travelers and says it’s for the traveler’s own good.[20]  Drone-like, Americans say, “Yes, fondle my wife’s breasts—or take a picture of my daughter’s.  And thank-you for protecting the hive.”

This constant monitoring isn’t unique to airports.  Our Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches are violated practically every time we leave our homes.  It’s happening with scanners at bus stations (video), metal detectors at government buildings and public events, and cameras on street corners.  Unfortunately, frightened Americans now think it’s reasonable to empty their pockets when they walk into buildings, and to be groped or virtually strip-searched at the airport by any federal agent in a uniform.

What’s particularly intrusive about body scanners and frisking is both practices push the limits of state control to the point where the state owns even our right to be clothed to protect the privacy of our own bodies.  What do we own if not our own bodies?  With body scanners, the state arrogates the right to strip and grope you whenever it wants.

There’s no hiding when Big Brother is watching you.

What’s Next?

“If it keeps us safe, I’m all for it.” – An American sheep responding to questions about the latest federal incursion (pick one) on his/her liberties.

Secretary of Homeland Security Napolitano wants air travelers watched around the world.  At a Montreal meeting of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), she urged other countries “to move to the next stage of screening”:

The U.S. Homeland Security chief will urge 190 nations today to improve aviation security with body scanners and other innovations to stop terrorists from carrying plastic and powdered explosives onto airplanes.[21]

What other innovations does Napolitano refer to?  Plastic gloves for checking rectums now that terrorists carry explosives there?

Americans already willingly spread their legs, raise their arms in surrender, and submit to virtual strip searches and real gropes.  When Big Brother asks, most double-thinking “free” Americans won’t give it a second thought before they bend over.

________________________________

[1] Nineteen Eighty-Four, by George Orwell, New American Library, N.Y., 1949, p. 5.

[2] Night, Elie Wiesel, Bantam Books, Inc., 1982, pp. 14-15.

[3] “Obama Sides With Bush in Spy Case,” By David Kravets, Wired, January 22, 2009, (Accessed at http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/01/obama-sides-wit/ on Oct. 19, 2010).

[4] “Many Women Say Airport Pat-Downs Are a Humiliation,” By JOE SHARKEY, NY Times, November 23, 2004, (Accessed at http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/23/business/23grope.html?pagewanted=print&position= on Sept. 27, 2010).

[5] “Revealing X-ray machine set to scan Sky Harbor fliers,” Ginger D. Richardson, Arizona Republic, Feb. 23, 2007, (Accessed at http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/local/articles/0223backscatter0223.html on Oct. 22, 2010).

[6] “Full-Body Scanner Begins Tests at Phoenix Airport,” October 11, 2007, AP, (Accessed at http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,301160,00.html on Oct. 21, 2010).

[7] “Airport-security plan calls for 500 body scanners in '11,” By Thomas Frank, USA TODAY, 2/3/2010, (Accessed at http://www.usatoday.com/travel/flights/2010-02-02-body-scanner_N.htm on Oct. 4, 2010).

[8] Would the federal government knowingly hurt people?  They’re not like the Nazis who experimented on concentration camp prisoners are they?

Consider:

• Tuskegee experiments
• Unethical human experimentation in the US
• Syphilis experiments in Guatemala by US[9]
• Collateral damage in any war.

[9] “U.S. Apologizes for Syphilis Tests in Guatemala,” By DONALD G. McNEIL Jr., NY Times, October 1, 2010, (Accessed at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/02/health/research/02infect.html?_r=1&th&emc=th on Oct. 2, 2010).

[10] “Scientists Question Safety Of New Airport Scanners,” by Richard Knox, May 17, 2010, (Accessed at http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=126833083 on July 21, 2010).

[11] “Are Scanners Worth the Risk?” By SUSAN STELLIN, NY Times, September 7, 2010, (Accessed at http://travel.nytimes.com/2010/09/12/travel/12prac.html on Oct. 3, 2010).

[12] “TSA Launches Millimeter Wave Technology in Richmond,” TSA Press Release, Nov. 14, 2008, (Accessed at http://www.tsa.gov/press/releases/2008/1114.shtm on Oct. 24, 2010).

[13] “New scanners break child porn laws,” Alan Travis, Guardian, 4 January 2010, (Accessed at http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/jan/04/new-scanners-child-porn-laws on Oct. 24, 2010).

[14] “Body scanners unveiled at JFK Airport; Homeland Security Sect. Janet Napolitano doesn't volunteer,” BY Christina Boyle, DAILY NEWS, October 22nd 2010, (Accessed at http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2010/10/22/2010-10-22_body_scanners_unveiled_at_jfk_airport_homeland_security_sect_janet_napolitano_do.html on Oct. 27, 2010).

At 1:50 in the Daily News video, the woman Image Operator (IO) operating the scanner inadvertently shows the ability of the machine to show more resolution when she scans over the left foot of the scanned image for an instant.  (This capability is more apparent in this video.)  She immediately moves the cursor as this capability contradicts Asst. Administrator Kair’s statements.

[15] “Feds admit they stored body scanner images, despite TSA claim the images cannot be saved,” NY Daily News, BY Aliyah Shahid, August 4th 2010, (Accessed at http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2010/08/04/2010-08-04_feds_admit_they_stored_body_scanner_images_despite_tsa_claim_the_images_cannot_b.html?obref=obnetwork on Oct. 22, 2010).

[16] “Body scanners can store, send images, group says,” By Jeanne Meserve and Mike M. Ahlers, CNN, January 11, 2010, (Accessed at http://edition.cnn.com/2010/TRAVEL/01/11/body.scanners/  on Oct. 24, 2010).

[17] “Feds admit storing checkpoint body scan images,” by Declan McCullagh, CNET, August 4, 2010, (Accessed at http://news.cnet.com/8301-31921_3-20012583-281.html on Oct. 3, 2010).

[18] In Florida: “TSA Screener Cited "Torture" In Scanner Case; Arrestee's genitalia was exposed by "full body" device,” Smoking Gun, (Accessed at http://www.thesmokinggun.com/documents/bizarre/tsa-screener-cited-torture-scanner-case on Sept. 24, 2010).

In Philadelphia: “Another flier's run-in with the TSA,” by Daniel Rubin, The Inquirer, June 14, 2010, (Accessed at http://www.philly.com/philly/news/local/96273368.html?&subscribe=y&listID=1782 on Oct. 22, 2010).

In Seattle: “Former TSA supervisor admits stealing luggage,” Aug. 16, 2010, Huffington Post, (Accessed at http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20100816/us-tsa-supervisor-theft/ on Oct. 22, 2010).

In Great Britain: “Airport Worker Pervs Over Woman In Body Scanner: ‘I Love Those Gigantic Tits’,” Paul Joseph Watson, Prison Planet.com, March 24, 2010, (Accessed at http://www.prisonplanet.com/airport-worker-pervs-over-woman-in-body-scanner-look-at-those-gigantic-tits.html on July 21, 2010).

In Nigeria: “Now showing at MMIA: Nude images of passengers; Security officials gather and giggle at naked travelers in body scanner,” By Chinedu Eze , 09.20.2010, (Accessed at http://odili.net/news/source/2010/sep/21/232.html on Sept. 30, 2010).

“They use the machines, installed in the wake of the Farouk AbdulMutallab affair, to watch the naked images of female passengers for fun.

“The controversial body scanners have been dubbed "e-stripping" in advanced countries because of the way they expose the nakedness of those being screened.

“THISDAY discovered that during off-peak periods, the aviation security officials, who are trained on the use of the scanners, usually stroll from the cubicle located in a hidden corner on the right side of the screening area where the 3D full-body scanner monitors are located.

“They do so to catch a glimpse of some of the passengers entering the machine and immediately go back to view the naked images, in order to match the faces with the images since the faces are blurred on the monitors while passengers are inside the machine.

“The face that appears on the scanner's monitor is usually blurred so that the operator viewing the full body will not recognise who passes through the machine.

“But by coming out to see the passenger in person and then going back to see his or her image, the objective of protecting the privacy of the passenger has been defeated.”

[19] “New Logan searches blasted TSA tests frisky frisking policy,” By Donna Goodison, Boston Herald, August 21, 2010, (Accessed at http://bostonherald.com/business/general/view.bg?articleid=1276131 on Oct. 20, 2010).

“Passengers shocked by new touchy-feely TSA screening,” By Donna Goodison, Boston Herald, August 24, 2010, (Accessed at http://www.bostonherald.com/business/general/view/20100823passengers_shocked_by_new_touchy-feely_tsa_screening/srvc=business&position=also on Oct. 21, 2010).

“Airline passengers from coast to coast are decrying the Transportation Security Administration’s more aggressive body searches, calling screeners’ new front-of-the-hand, slide-down technique not only invasive but an example of Big Brother run amok.
"Rob Webster said he was subjected to a head-to-toe body search that ‘did not miss an inch’ and even included a “probing and pushing” of his genital area when flying home from Las Vegas to Seattle last week.
“’If anybody ever groped me like that in real life, I would have punched them in their nose,’ the 50-year-old said. ‘It was extremely invasive. This was a very probing-type touching - not just patting over all your areas, but actually probing and pushing and seeing if I was concealing something in my genital area.’”

[20] “Breast Exams at the Airport: Do the New Security Measures Go Too Far?” By SHERRY F. COLB, Findlaw, Dec. 01, 2004, (Accessed at http://writ.news.findlaw.com/colb/20041201.html on Sept. 27, 2010).

“The hunches of security personnel (the reliability of whose hunches is nowhere evident) are now enough to subject people to what would otherwise constitute a sexual assault, that is, a nonconsensual touching of breasts and/or groin, as a condition for innocent non-suspects traveling freely around the country and internationally. ”

[21] “Napolitano pitches plan for air security to 190 nations,” By Thomas Frank, USA TODAY, 28 Sept. 2010, (Accessed at http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2010-09-28-1Anapolitano28_ST_N.htm on Sept. 30, 2010).