Experts agree; Technology would not have stopped plane bomber, so why the rush to install privacy-busting virtual strip search?
Paul Joseph Watson
Thursday, January 7, 2010
With experts agreeing that airport body scanners would not have stopped the underwear bomber from boarding Flight 253, the rush to implement them has been driven not by necessity, but by a media orchestrated PR hoax insinuating that every plane will be blown out of the sky unless TSA thugs are allowed to ogle your naked body.
The move to mandate airports to install body scanners has nothing to do with the government caring about our safety. Governments have no motivation to protect us from terrorist incidents which only help expand the war on terror that they are using as a pretext to further their geopolitical aims. How difficult is it to grasp this simple concept?
The Christmas Day bombing attempt was a stark reminder that the U.S. government couldn’t care less about stopping real terrorists. Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab had no passport, he was on a terror watch list, and his own father had tried to warn U.S. intelligence beforehand that he was a threat. And yet he walked right on board, aided by a well-dressed Indian man who has since disappeared with the FBI seemingly engaged in a cover-up to protect his identity.
While we are told that the government apparently “botched up” the intelligence that would have stopped Abdulmutallab, their reaction to the incident in seizing on it to advance the military-industrial complex agenda, both domestically and internationally, was instantaneous, flawless, and breathtaking.
A mass media corporate offensive swung into full gear within hours of the news calling for the widespread rollout of naked airport body scanners as a magic bullet, and the contrived “solution” to the contrived “problem” was duly delivered. The fact that security companies had already begun to implement the systems well over a year ago and were feverishly waiting on the right crisis with which to make the demand go supernova was not mentioned.
The vultures swooped to enjoy the rich pickings on offer as a result of the media’s rampant fearmongering. People like former Homeland Security chief Michael Chertoff lined their pockets by aggressively promoting the scanner technologies in which they are heavily invested.
But as usual, amidst the monotonous din of the pre-scripted talking point consensus, the truth that the body scanners would in fact have been completely useless in stopping the bomber was ignored.
Queen’s University expert David Wood told the Peterborough Examiner today that the body scanners “will not make air travel safer and will simply subject ordinary Canadians to more — and more intrusive — government scrutiny.”
“After an event such as the attempted Christmas Day airline bombing they have to be seen to be doing something, and often the easy thing to do is announce some sort of big shiny machine,” said Wood.
“Absolutely no amount of body searches will identify those people, and these new scanners are completely besides the point,” said Wood, noting that if the U.S. had merely followed its intelligence procedures properly, Abdulmutallab would never have got on the plane.
(ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW)
Wood’s assessment concurs with that of Ben Wallace, British MP and former associate of QinetiQ, an international defense technology company. Wallace worked with the body scanners and stated plainly that they would not have detected the explosives Abdulmutallab was allowed to carry on board.
“I must advise the Prime Minister â€“ and the British public â€“ that the scanners are not a “silver bullet,” said Wallace. “You would be mistaken to think that they would counter the new threat.”
“The millimetre wave technology is harmless, quick and can be deployed overtly or covertly. But it cannot detect chemicals or light plastics.”
The hype about body scanners is habitually accompanied by a raft of quotes from obedient slaves who are prepared to undergo whatever humiliation it takes to provide them with some imaginary sense of “security,” but a recent Guardian poll suggests that this may be nothing more than a giant public relations hoax to hoodwink the masses into cheerleading for their own enslavement.
We see them everywhere, on every TV network, saying exactly the same thing. Every time there is a major terrorist incident, the media endlessly replays footage of obedient Stepford Wife slaves in airports and on the streets calling for more police state measures to protect them from whatever invented boogeyman is being dangled in front of them this time around.
If we were to go by this measure, 99 per cent of people support whatever the government wants to do in the name of the war on terror. This is of course complete baloney – the last few years have seen a massive resurgence in opposition and skepticism towards government policy on almost every political front.
However, every time you pick up a newspaper, turn on the television, or log on to the Internet, the perception being contrived is that the vast majority overwhelmingly support stifling “security” measures in the name of stopping terrorism, with many even lamenting that such intrusions do not go far enough.
A prime example of this appears in a Toronto Star article entitled Scanners a necessary evil, say travellers.
“Travellers seem happy to be electronically disrobed if it makes flying safer,” we are told. The article then quotes a series of happy-clapping morons who tell the Star what it wants to hear, that people should not resist the implementation of naked body scanners in airports.
“I’d do anything for safety,” said Pari Paramasivam, while waiting for a flight to India at Pearson airport’s Terminal 1.
“For me, if it’s privacy versus safety, it’s always safety.”
According to the Star, all six people they interviewed “accept the need for airport full-body scanners”.
However, the notion that the vast majority of people support airports becoming the primary peddlers of child porn is completely contradicted by a London Guardian poll which found that over 70% opposed the body scanners, labeling them “a pointless invasion of privacy”.
The controllers routinely roll out this mass hoax in the interests of maintaining a “monkey see, monkey do” hive mentality, where people who would ordinarily be opposed having their naked children perved over by some fat greasy TSA agent in a back room are actually brainwashed into thinking this is normal because the other proles they see jabbering on TV say it is.
While this kind of crude propaganda works on a significant number of people, probably nearly as many still have two brain cells to rub together and are rightly repulsed at such a gross violation of privacy, but you won’t see them being interviewed on the evening news because the corporate media, which is owned by the same military-industrial complex making a killing as a result of the implementation of body scanners, doesn’t want the rest of the zombies to awake from their Stockholm syndrome and tear down the walls of the prison planet being built around them.
This article was posted: Thursday, January 7, 2010 at 10:25 am