It sounds to me like you are using Israel as an example of why we should use the scanners. I've read in various news outlets that Isreal doesn't use the "naked scanners" because they don't work because they are ineffective and invasive. I've been through the Tel Aviv airport three times this year (and twice in through land crossings); I can say without a moment's hesitation that they are far less physically invasive than our TSA. No doubt Israeli security is very good... they absolutely do not fuck around with security, and they don't use the standard TSA tactics. That should tell you something.

I think you're right though - we should emulate Israel as they are far better at security than us. Step one: get rid of the kabuki dance and employ measures that are actually effective.

Bonus quote: "I don’t know why everybody is running to buy these expensive and useless machines (they are useless). I can overcome the body scanners with enough explosives to bring down a Boeing 747, that is why we have not put body scans our airport." - Rafi Sela, Israeli security expert who designed the security in Israel’s largest airport.

He is talking about the ridiculous "sunken cube" shape of the boxee box.

What if I vote for you?

Bah. Forgot the link

Although this thing idea is neat, there is an Israeli company that is currently selling RF tech to do the same thing. It comes in a package the size of a suitcase, and can be deployed without having to put transmitters/receivers all over the place. Check it out.

I actually applied to work for that company but wasn't smart enough. Blasted Israelis and their blasted smarter-than-me-ness.

I look for Google Wave to fill that void within 12 months.

The OP is referring to the suspicionless internal DHS (border control) check points.
    * http://www.aliciapatterson.org/APF1804/Davidson/Davidson.html
    * http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=b92_1231335983

I can't find anything official from the DHS website, but the claim seems to be that DHS can legally set up spots away from the border and act as if they are at the border for purposes of questioning and searches.

Biden also had the rare luck of working across the street from a regional rail hub. Unless we all start working right next to our regional hubs (not likely) it seems to make sense that local transit has to improve a lot for the overall system to become useful.

Incidentally, I live in the DC metro area (NoVA) close to a metro station. Unless I am going to DC proper or Reagan airport I generally have to drive.

Masnick's Law! You can always see it coming from a mile.

I agree that the software will tell part of the story on whether or not the device is accurate, but I'd be interested in examining the hardware too. It is easy to imagine that varying conditions (temp, humidity, altitude, exhaust, smoker lung, etc) could alter the operation of the hardware even before the software comes into play. How have these variables been neutralized? Casting doubt on the device would be easy.

Casting doubt is what the defense is interested in, but what the public should really be interested in is the test data (from an independent third party). Have they conducted appropriate tests across sufficient body types and environmental conditions? Lets see the results.

I would think evaporation would be a large consideration, no? If you go to a historically dry place and make large (shallow?) pools of water it may get quite expensive to keep filling them up.

I would think a sunny, humid, place with cheap undeveloped treeless land would be ideal. A swamp somewhere?