AzDar
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Dec-30-09 11:31 AM
Original message |
Any possibility that GE has a financial stake in the company/companies that produce 'Body Scanners'? |
|
They sure were promoting them like carnival barkers on MSNBC this morning...
|
Lance_Boyle
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Dec-30-09 11:35 AM
Response to Original message |
1. GE makes the air puffers, not sure about the scanners. |
|
But I'd not be surprised if they have a stake in it - GE does imaging well.
|
ginnyinWI
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Dec-30-09 11:44 AM
Response to Reply #1 |
3. No I don't think they make the scannners. |
|
According to my husband who works for GE (in medical imaging), they are getting out of the security business altogether. The puffers don't work and nobody likes to buy them.
|
Don Caballero
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Dec-30-09 11:38 AM
Response to Original message |
2. Those who are worried about their privacy should not use airports |
|
In this age where terrorists are attempting to exploit any lax in security, privacy must not be of concern. If GE does make these machines more power to them. They deserve the contracts.
|
RC
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Dec-30-09 11:56 AM
Response to Reply #2 |
|
"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin
|
City Lights
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Dec-30-09 11:57 AM
Response to Reply #5 |
Don Caballero
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Dec-30-09 12:08 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
7. Franklin lived in a different time, a simpler time |
|
We face an enemy that hides in the shadows and will strike at any time. I am willing to bet Franklin would be for the surveillance society we live in today. He would advocate safety over privacy.
|
AzDar
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Dec-30-09 12:11 PM
Response to Reply #7 |
8. Perhaps you should read up on Mr. Franklin IF you truly believe what you're saying... |
|
Sounds as though you know very little about the man.
|
backscatter712
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Dec-30-09 12:47 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
9. Ridiculous false dilemma. |
|
Edited on Wed Dec-30-09 12:49 PM by backscatter712
The feds don't want to do the job the right way.
Contrary to popular belief, you do not have to sacrifice privacy, dignity and civil liberties to get security. The Rethugs push this false dilemma on us over and over, and too many of us fall for it. Now that the Crotch Bomber incident happened, the Rethugs are just creaming their pants in anticipation of more of their authoritarianism. Really, the only thing the full-body scanners are going to do is get the next terrorist to stuff his bomb in his rectum...
Can the virtual strip search really do more than a well-trained officer observing the crowd looking for sketchy behavior? Counterintelligence (such as what didn't get passed on to the appropriate authorities in the case of the Crotch Bomber) can suss out terrorist plots long before they make it to the airport. These kinds of tactics are far more effective, and far less intrusive upon civil liberties than the digital strip search.
|
bullwinkle428
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Dec-30-09 11:48 AM
Response to Original message |
4. I have no doubt Michael Chertoff has a financial stake in them, |
|
as part of his "security consultation" business - just listen to this interview on NPR: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=122018593
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Fri May 10th 2024, 08:20 PM
Response to Original message |