New Body Scanner Tested At Bangkok Airport

[webfact]

New body scanner tested at airport

By Jednipat Chansopeekul

The Nation

Published on January 26, 2010

BANGKOK: - The Airports of Thailand (AOT) began a one-month test yesterday of a new body scanner at Suvarnabhumi.

The GEN2 is said to offer a secure and discreet method for detecting hidden items, such as explosives, weapons, contraband, stolen electronic items or restricted good like bottles of liquid or gels.

It is made by Brijot Imaging Systems Inc and imported by Law Enforcement Technology Solutions Co Ltd.

The manufacturer says it does not reveal passengers' physical details or cause them any radioactive harm, because it uses a 'passive radiometric scanning' technique.

The GEN2 relies on a millimetre-long wave imaging system and can do full motion and real-time passive scans. Each unit costs Bt3.5 million.

For screening, passengers have to stand without their wristwatch and coat or outer garments in front of the GEN2, before turning around for 5-10 seconds for a full scan, without security guards touching people's bodies.

The new scanner will be used to screen passengers departing on international flights at Suvarnabhumi Airport for the next month.

"Firstly we will set the new GEN2 as a choice for passengers. After passing walk-through metal detectors, they can choose to be screened by hand-held metal detectors or the GEN2 if they want to be comfortable," AOT deputy director Narongchai Thanantchangsaeng said.

AOT will evaluate the new scanner's accuracy, ease of use and its impact size.

General manager of Law Enforcement Technology Solutions, Tachit Tivaruan-grong, said: "Its accuracy is about 80 per cent. Other countries testing the GEN2 body scanner are England and Indonesia. In a month, the GEN2 will show its ability to detect suspicious hidden items and I hope in the future we will have the GEN2 to mainly use at Suvarnabhumi Airport."

Normally, passengers have to walk through metal detectors and are then screened for suspicious hidden items by hand-held metal detectors, or frisked by security guards - a task that takes 45-60 seconds.

But some passengers fear machines that reveal too much.

"I won't agree to be scanned by a scanner that shows my physical details obviously. If the new body scanner does not work that way, I will use it," Thunyarun Jantapao, a woman at Suvarnabhumi, said.

-- The Nation 2010-01-26

[newsfooter][/newsfooter]

[thaimiller]

The more security the better in my opinion, even if it is annoying sometimes its better than being blown out of the sky.

[bkkjames]

I think most people around here will be fearful that the thing will reveal a gap between their ears.

[salty]

I am glad I like cheap watches. Quite possible a few will get "mislaid" while people are being scanned.

[Reasonableman]

Yeah, you may be right! Duh!

But it is interesting how, since 9/11, the world has surrendered more and more freedoms to protect their freedom...we used to defend our right to privacy, but now it seems we roll over and play dead rather than protest that it is perhaps going too far, that the climate of fear and paranoia is leading us down a rocky path towards...towards.....what?

I think most people around here will be fearful that the thing will reveal a gap between their ears.

[puyaidon]

It should be "no scan, no fly" for the most part. These excuses sound like little children.

Most of the hype says that it reveals too much. Too much fat, too small breasts, that is the hangup with most people. Or maybe their underwear is dirty.

Glad the airport is doing something considering how much bad publicity they have had in the past.

[tonititan]

It should be "no scan, no fly" for the most part. These excuses sound like little children.

Exactly! The rest of us want to be safe, and if you don't feel uncomfortable with the security measures, then don't fly!

[The Mask]

It should be "no scan, no fly" for the most part. These excuses sound like little children.

Most of the hype says that it reveals too much. Too much fat, too small breasts, that is the hangup with most people. Or maybe their underwear is dirty.

Glad the airport is doing something considering how much bad publicity they have had in the past.

Yes the elites find it fun humiliating the sheeple and lemmings who occupy this planet and couldnt care less about their personal freedoms and liberties. Its interesting how the underwear bomber coincided with an initial rejection of body scanners at the airports - now of course everyone is screaming for them in the name of 'safety'.

Problem - Reaction - Solution

Are people so blind they cant see whats happening?

[filingaccount]

They test the body scanners in Germany... with quite embarrassing results for the scanner company.

Come to your own conclusions.

[Reasonableman]

Nice to have a spokesperson (unelected) for the rest of us. Actually, if I don't feel unconfortable with the security measures I will fly, isn't it?

It should be "no scan, no fly" for the most part. These excuses sound like little children.

Exactly! The rest of us want to be safe, and if you don't feel uncomfortable with the security measures, then don't fly!

[Reasonableman]

In addition to all the undetected bomb-making ingredients he had, there was something hghlighted belwo his abdomen that looked disturbingly familiar

They test the body scanners in Germany... with quite embarrassing results for the scanner company.

Come to your own conclusions.

[Thai at Heart]

They test the body scanners in Germany... with quite embarrassing results for the scanner company.

Come to your own conclusions.

Hmm, the scanner that doesn't scan. I can see the blood drain out of the face of the company representatives face as he is confronted with the all the extra hidden stuff. All a bit sneaky, but a fair experiment.

[H2oDunc]

I still find it at odds with everything that the ex head of homeland security in the USA is now the CEO of the company selling these full body scanners ? People keep telling me this is just a normal business practice but to me the whole thing stinks.

Nobody has yet to explain to me how a guy with no luggage, buys his ticket with cash and has no passport, Oh and best of all, has a bomb strapped to his leg is allowed onto a plane in this day and age ?

As the mask says this is all part of the problem, reaction, solution psychology used by our leaders.

[nasajsc]

It should be "no scan, no fly" for the most part. These excuses sound like little children.

Most of the hype says that it reveals too much. Too much fat, too small breasts, that is the hangup with most people. Or maybe their underwear is dirty.

Glad the airport is doing something considering how much bad publicity they have had in the past.

The airport doing something right? Once they enforce these scanners, the lines will stretch out into the ground

floor taxi areas, all the way from the top floor departures. So while waiting 6 hours to clear immigration and get scanned

on a friday night flight out of here, you will have the pleasure of being harassed by taxi touts wanting to drive you

to pattaya.

[Meridian007]

I wish they would give us more info regardless. Will the scan look more like this:

Or will it be showing down to skin? I think they would have to have only female guards at the scanners, or nobody would consent.

There was another thread about this, (and privacy), that made a good point. Once there is something that can see your genitals, it will be fetishized. How long until DVDs of the scans are available at Pantip?

We need safety, but at what cost to human freedom and dignity?

[Chang_paarp]

They test the body scanners in Germany... with quite embarrassing results for the scanner company.

Come to your own conclusions.

Hmm, the scanner that doesn't scan. I can see the blood drain out of the face of the company representatives face as he is confronted with the all the extra hidden stuff. All a bit sneaky, but a fair experiment.

Probably not the best decision on the company's side to send in a manager to do the scan rather than their crack operator. Let the manager be the talking head, but have a well trained operator run the equipment.

[poldebol]

" .... Since the attack was foiled, body-scanners, using "millimetre-wave" technology and revealing a naked image of a passenger, have been touted as a solution to the problem of detecting explosive devices that are not picked up by traditional metal detectors – such as those containing liquids, chemicals or plastic explosive.

But Ben Wallace, the Conservative MP, who was formerly involved in a project by a leading British defence research firm to develop the scanners for airport use, said trials had shown that such low-density materials went undetected.

Tests by scientists in the team at Qinetiq, which Mr Wallace advised before he became an MP in 2005, showed the millimetre-wave scanners picked up shrapnel and heavy wax and metal, but plastic, chemicals and liquids were missed. ...."

from The Independent 3 january 2010. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-...am-1856175.html

If public money is spent to increase safety, I agree.

If public money is spent in the name of safety, but in reality just creates business opportunities, I disagree.

If public money is spent to terrify the public into accepting more and more curbs to individual freedom and our traditional values, we ought to do wake up and do something.

This is the second time in a few days where we see examples of governments spending money in the name of our safety, without proper evidence of the effectivity of the tools they buy (see the fake bomb detector).

In the case of the underwear bomber flying into Detroit, the billions of dollars consuming secret services have shown to be bungling and acting without focus. Idem in the case of the picture of the "aging Osama".

[Dakhar]

I wish they would give us more info regardless. Will the scan look more like this:

Or will it be showing down to skin? I think they would have to have only female guards at the scanners, or nobody would consent.

There was another thread about this, (and privacy), that made a good point. Once there is something that can see your genitals, it will be fetishized. How long until DVDs of the scans are available at Pantip?

We need safety, but at what cost to human freedom and dignity?

ProVision = PornVision

Edited January 26, 2010 by Dakhar

[animatic]

If it can tell intestinal or vaginal contents it can see EVERYTHING you got.

Three things;

if it can I MAY stop bombers or may not, but smugglers are toast.

if it can it WILL show you pecker size and any personal disfigurements too.

If it can it's a waste of money because it will stop nothing.

When they can mold plastic explosives to the shape and form of trainer soles,

what is that it can then detect? the DENSITY of the trainers being different?

Enough to pull someone aside for a sniff check?

[GungaDin]

I hope that the scanners weren't supplied by Jim McCormick.

[teatree]

QUOTE

Yes the elites find it fun humiliating the sheeple and lemmings who occupy this planet and couldnt care less about their personal freedoms and liberties. Its interesting how the underwear bomber coincided with an initial rejection of body scanners at the airports - now of course everyone is screaming for them in the name of 'safety'.

Problem - Reaction - Solution

Are people so blind they cant see whats happening?

QUOTE

Indeed. Create a problem, cause a reaction (fear) and then come along with a solution that would never have been accepted originally. The hegelian dialectic has been a cornerstone for governments to push through their agenda for centuries.

Just a few days ago we heard from Emmanuel Goldstein (a.k.a. Osama Bin Laden) reminding everyone of why we must sacrifice our freedom for the sake of liberty - except that freedom and liberty are the same thing.

How long before there are calls from the big brother apologists to have body scanners in shopping malls, night clubs or any other public place? A few attempted terrorist attacks in these areas should do the trick.

As did Winston Smith in Orwell's '1984' most people are growing to LOVE big brother.

Edited January 26, 2010 by teatree

[Crushdepth]

German TV on the Failure of Full-Body Scanners:

The scanner caught a subject's cell phone and Swiss Army knife -- and the microphone he was wearing -- but missed all the components to make a bomb that he hid on his body.

More technology will not improve security. There's always a simple way to beat the machine. And even if it works the nongs that will be running these things will be half asleep, doing their nails or far too busy ogling your tits to notice. They'd be better off training their staff and implementing their current security checks *properly*.

Edited January 26, 2010 by Crushdepth

[conimex]

Actually, a very poor investment, just 80% secure, better go for the latest body scanners, those are 100% secure.

There are different ways to monitor the scan, done by computer, or possible to let one monitor the scan on distance, so you won't be confronted with that person, nothing to worry about your extra bodyfat or the size of your breasts or whatsoever....

http://content.schiphol.nl/info/security_scan/scan.htm

Edited January 26, 2010 by conimex

[bkkjames]

Personally speaking, I think the day is coming that after checkin we will have to strip down and put on 'secure' overalls while handing over all our clothes to authorities.

Seems do-able to me.

Your overalls would match the flight number and you will be scanned through the entire process to avoid you missing your flight.

On low cost carriers you will have to pay extra for these.

Those flying business and first class on traditional carriers will have your overalls deloused, pressed and the ensemble comes complete with silk slippers and the morning paper. Of course your overalls will not be the same colour as those in economy class in order to maintain all possibilities to gain face.

[iforget]

Is there a hand-held version? Be good for spotting katoey.

[lomatopo]

I haven't followed the latest developments on the various models of body scanners but understood that, when/if implemented, you can opt out and go for a pat-down type "scan". Also, in most countries minors cannot go through these scanners as this constitutes a form of child pornography.

Also, these scanners cannot detect items hidden inside the body, nor even externally in fat-folds.

Once some these videos get leaked to the internet hopefully there will be some push-back.

[mythBuster]

Fact is that people only feel more secure, though it hardly improves security at all. The fact this this scanner detects "Stolen" electronic items says a lot about the nonsense argument the car salesman used to convince his bribe taker. If you steal something and you are going to a body scanner you do not wear it on your body I assume, you have put it in your luggage, nobody ask you to bring the receipts of each and any item you are carrying.

False claims are made and intellectually lazy journalists write down the rubbish without thinking for themselves.

[Sunny Valentine]

Correct me if I am wrong, but I cant remember ever having heard of any of these "Security" measures at Airports having prevented a real threat yet.

But real threat happens (sparsely, but still) in air.

So, what does that tell us?

For me it is clear, and in line with the information that was made available on the above-mentioned TV series:

A determined suicide terrorist will always be able to create havoc, unless he or she is stupid. No matter what technology we use to prevent this, he or she will always find a loophole. More technology does not lead to more security, it just leads to less of that what those who order to use this technology falsely proclaim to protect: Freedom.

[BlueSmurf]

Nothing to hide then no problem..Maybe the small dick syndrome may affect a few but hey are'nt we all big over here? lol

[draftvader]

Absolutely no problem....if you're hung like a Donkey!!!