The guy who ordered the body scanners now works for the company that makes them
1–10 of 46 posts
Re: The guy who ordered the body scanners now works for the company that makes them
#2The issue is one of privacy. These corruption accusations detract from the heart of the matter.
Would it be a "win" if the scanners were all removed because of corruption? No, the point is the acknowledgement of the rights of the individual to a certain level of privacy.
By the way, it's not weird for a man to switch to a company he's dealt with personally and whose products he presumably respects.
Re: The guy who ordered the body scanners now works for the company that makes them
#3He doesn't actually work for the company. Rapiscan Systems is a client of his security firm Chertoff Group. Here is a more detailed article http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2010/0...
Re: The guy who ordered the body scanners now works for the company that makes them
#4The issue is one of privacy. These corruption accusations detract from the heart of the matter. Would it be a "win" if the scanners were all removed because of corruption? No, the point is the acknowledgement of the rights of the individual to a certain level of privacy. By the way, it's not weird for a man to switch to a company he's dealt with personally and whose products he presumably respects.
[deleted]
Re: The guy who ordered the body scanners now works for the company that makes them
#5The issue is one of privacy. These corruption accusations detract from the heart of the matter. Would it be a "win" if the scanners were all removed because of corruption? No, the point is the acknowledgement of the rights of the individual to a certain level of privacy. By the way, it's not weird for a man to switch to a company he's dealt with personally and whose products he presumably respects.
A friend and I were just talking about a "Career Pattern" in which an executive who brought in a 3rd party (often a startup) winds up working for them after leaving his BigCo. It's all too common.
Re: The guy who ordered the body scanners now works for the company that makes them
#6The issue is one of privacy. These corruption accusations detract from the heart of the matter. Would it be a "win" if the scanners were all removed because of corruption? No, the point is the acknowledgement of the rights of the individual to a certain level of privacy. By the way, it's not weird for a man to switch to a company he's dealt with personally and whose products he presumably respects.
The issue is that our privacy is being violated not just for vague promises of 'national security' but for his personal gain.
Re: The guy who ordered the body scanners now works for the company that makes them
#7The issue is one of privacy. These corruption accusations detract from the heart of the matter. Would it be a "win" if the scanners were all removed because of corruption? No, the point is the acknowledgement of the rights of the individual to a certain level of privacy. By the way, it's not weird for a man to switch to a company he's dealt with personally and whose products he presumably respects.
The issue is that our privacy is being violated not just for vague promises of 'national security' but for his personal gain.
The debate should be about the ethics of privacy and HOW it is being violated, not WHY.
Suppose it was proven to help national security, suppose it was scientifically proven safe, would its use be palatable?
There is a question over what privacy needs to be protected. If this issue gets too into WHY these devices were purchased, we may lose the next privacy debate.
Re: The guy who ordered the body scanners now works for the company that makes them
#8The issue is one of privacy. These corruption accusations detract from the heart of the matter. Would it be a "win" if the scanners were all removed because of corruption? No, the point is the acknowledgement of the rights of the individual to a certain level of privacy. By the way, it's not weird for a man to switch to a company he's dealt with personally and whose products he presumably respects.
It's true that it's very common and there is often nothing untoward about it.
The issue that I think is most relevant is that there has been virtually no transparency about the machines, the health and privacy risks they pose, etc.
It's as if these contractors with high level government connections made a big sale to the US Government and the public had no choice about whether to pay for it or whether to consent to the risks.
Learning that one of the main beneficiaries of this big sale was the very recent head of the government office that purchased the machines suggests that perhaps there was worry that transparency might have jeopardized that commission.
Re: The guy who ordered the body scanners now works for the company that makes them
#9He doesn't actually work for the company. Rapiscan Systems is a client of his security firm Chertoff Group. Here is a more detailed article http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2010/0...
Not much different. He generates sales for Rapidscan, in return they buy consulting service from his company.
Re: The guy who ordered the body scanners now works for the company that makes them
#10The issue is one of privacy. These corruption accusations detract from the heart of the matter. Would it be a "win" if the scanners were all removed because of corruption? No, the point is the acknowledgement of the rights of the individual to a certain level of privacy. By the way, it's not weird for a man to switch to a company he's dealt with personally and whose products he presumably respects.
It would be a huge win if the scanners were removed because of corruption. It would be an even bigger win if people went to jail because of it, but I'm not holding my breath.
"The heart of the matter" is restoring our rights at the airport. Exposing the corruption that's part of the surveillance-industrial complex can play a big role in this. Privacy, effectivness, civil liberties, impact on business, and kids rights are all good avenues as well.