|
|
|
|
|
|
by bhickey
5693 days ago
|
|
|
There is no evidence of critical thinking or questioning whether all these claims are correct.
I'm afraid that I don't understand your comment. Let's look at some reports from the mainstream media (not this scary 'net' that you mention):Images of Shah Rukh Kahn, one of the biggest Bollywood stars, were leaked.
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/2684287/bollywood_s... At least one penis joke was made, and it led to one TSA agent assaulting another.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-20004436-504083.html There has been criticism as to the radiation dosage model used to evaluate machine safety. Safety studies have been carried out in animal models.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=1268330... Security theatre. Let's think this through: The people who are smuggling bombs onto aircraft are suicide bombers. Drug mules swallow condoms full of cocaine to bring product over the border. Do you think it's considerably more difficult to eat a condom full of semtex? The nude-o-scope can't inspect the contents of your stomach. Abdullah Hassan Al Aseery put PETN in his anus. How do you counter that threat model? Where do you see an absence of critical thinking? |
|
|
For your second example, was that situation, a TSA training session where agents were watching each other go through the machine, applicable to the passenger screening scenario, where the display is in a separate room and the screening agent never directly sees or is seen by the passenger?
For your third example, you can find plenty of evidence online that these machines are safe.
As far as the bomb up the butt, that guy failed because too much force went into ripping him apart. Butt bombs are an unproven technology, and should increase the difficulty and uncertainty for the bombers.