Millions of Travelers Quietly Rated for Terror Potential

[fasttense]

Those Wrongly-Profiled Can't See or Challenge Ratings That Will Be Kept for 40 Years

By MICHAEL J. SNIFFEN, AP

WASHINGTON (Dec. 1) - Without notifying the public, federal agents for the past four years have assigned millions of international travelers, including Americans, computer-generated scores rating the risk they pose of being terrorists or criminals.

The travelers are not allowed to see or directly challenge these risk assessments, which the government intends to keep on file for 40 years.

The scores are assigned to people entering and leaving the United States after computers assess their travel records, including where they are from, how they paid for tickets, their motor vehicle records, past one-way travel, seating preference and what kind of meal they ordered.

http://articles.news.aol.com/news/_a/millions-of-travelers-quietly-rated-for/20061130230309990009

[snappyturtle]

1. It's time to.....................

:hide: imho............what a nightmare!

[Crayson]

2. Not only the fact, that you are screened for risk...

... but these records stay for 40 years!!
EVERY SINGLE FLIGHT!


Like: "where have you been Juli 5th 1971??"
You might not even remember yourself, but THEY will know!

[Massachusetts]

3. "Orwellian"

-Manipulation of language for political ends. Most significantly by introducing to words meanings in opposition to their denotative meanings.
-Invasion of personal privacy by the state, whether physically or by means of surveillance.
-The total control of daily life by the government, as in a "Big Brother" society.
-The disintegration of the family unit by the state.
-The replacement of religious faith with worship of the state in a semi-religious manner.
-Active encouragement by the state of "doublethink," whereby the population must learn to embrace inconsistent concepts without dissent.
-The denial or rewriting of past events.
-A dystopian or antiutopian future.
-The use of verbose and ambiguous language.

-Wikipedia (I'm getting lazy)

Where are we? How many have we met out of 8?

[noonwitch]

7. This is just the trend of government to qualify everything by giving it a numerical score

Trust me, I've been working for the government for almost 20 years. Everything has to be given a numerical score, because the people upstairs can't read properly.

I wouldn't worry specifically about this violating rights in and of itself-if anything, it's set up to make things allegedly more efficient and save time at the gate. Not that it will work that way, but I'm sure that the good folks at Homeland Security believe it will.

[calimary]

8. So now, kids, let's put the cherry on top: bow to newt gingrich's hard-on

to be begged to run for president (as he announced during a speech this week) so he can officially bury the Constitution (or cremate it) now that bush has murdered it.

Let's all remember him - newt "I think the First Amendment needs some modification" gingrich.

[spinbaby]

4. Some of this doesn't even make sense

Motor vehicle records? What, are terrorists bad drivers? And what does seating have to do with anything? Does my preference for an aisle seat make me a suspect?

[leesa]

5. Whew! I love window seats....but I order veggie...but wait, there's no food

anyway. This makes the USSR look good.

[Ravy]

6. I could see that a preference for a middle seat would cause

an alarm to go off somewhere *grin*.

[Hibernias Daughter]

9. Millions of travelers rated for terror potential

Wow, this is disturbing...

WASHINGTON (Dec. 1) - Without their knowledge, millions of Americans and foreigners crossing U.S. borders in the past four years have been assigned scores generated by U.S. government computers rating the risk that the travelers are terrorists or criminals.

The travelers are not allowed to see or directly challenge these risk assessments, which the government intends to keep on file for 40 years.

The government calls the system critical to national security following the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Some privacy advocates call it one of the most intrusive and risky schemes yet mounted in the name of anti-terrorism efforts.

Virtually every person entering and leaving the United States by air, sea or land is scored by the Homeland Security Department's Automated Targeting System, or ATS. The scores are based on ATS' analysis of their travel records and other data, including items such as where they are from, how they paid for tickets, their motor vehicle records, past one-way travel, seating preference and what kind of meal they ordered.

More...

http://articles.news.aol.com/news/_a/millions-of-travelers-rated-for-terror/20061130230309990009?ncid=NWS00010000000001

[ThomCat]

10. I've traveled to and from Canada a bunch of times

in the last four years. Wonderful.

I think it should be illegal for anyone, including the government, to have any file on you that you are not allowed to see upon request.

[AndyTiedye]

11. They Even Put Senator Kennedy on the "No Fly" List Once

He is the only person who has even been able to get himself taken OFF the "No Fly" list.

[Alhena]

12. I'm sure I'm in the minority on this ...

I'm obviously in the minority here, but when I get on a plane I'd be willing to have the government check my records and those of my co-passengers if it would help ensure I'm not on a plane that gets flown into a building. Correct me if I'm wrong, but we're talking about a database that I will never know is being searched and will only be used for things like deciding to which flights federal air marshalls will be assigned. I don't see this as being on par with doing away with habeas corpus or sending people to Guantanamo without any due process at all.

[SoCalifer]

14. "The Right!

to be secure in your persons, houses, papers and effects against unreasonable searches shall not be violated"

It is an injury to be spied on without due process of law. The right to privacy is just as basic and important as to the right of life.

[Alhena]

17. Not as a matter of law ....

"It is an injury to be spied on without due process of law. The right to privacy is just as basic and important as to the right of life."

If you want to debate this in the context of the actual law- the Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution, then you would realize that the 4th amendment isn't violated under the circumstances described in this article. Searching public databases and the like is not a 4th Amendment violation, any more than performing credit checks. Plus, the U.S. Supreme Court has held that when a person decides to fly on an airplane, he consents to security checks which would constitutes unlawful searches and seizures in other contexts. That's why they can search through your bags at the airport as a routine matter while they would need probable cause to do so in other situations.

Now, you're perfectly free to consider this practices distateful, but it's not unconstitutional. If I'm wrong, you can expect that a federal district judge somewhere will be striking it down.

My position on this matter is that if there are 5 young Arab men booked on my flight with one-way tickets, I'd prefer that they be shown the same courtesies and respect that any passenger is shown. But I'd also prefer that security personnel acknowledge the simple FACT that these men are a greater security risk than five elderly women and take discrete, behind the scenes actions accordingly. E.g. assign an air marshall to the flight. No one need know it ever happened. That seems like a reasonable balance between civility and public safety to me.

[The Stranger]

15. Great -- then go tell them you want to be on the database. Everyone else wants off.

[SoCalifer]

16. I don't get it?

What in my post suggests that I would want to be on this list?

:shrug:

[The Stranger]

18. My post was in response to post #12, not your post.

[gratuitous]

19. Yes, you're in the minority on this, and here's why

Plain and simple: 40 years. You're on this list for 40 years. I don't know how old you are, bu ta lot can happen in 40 years. Forty years ago, in 1966, there was controversy about mixed-race marriages. A lot of people were putting their livelihoods, reputations and social standing on the line so that blacks and whites could get married. A lot of people in positions of authority were very down on people that advocated for mixed-race marriages.

Nowadays, race mixing isn't much of an issue at all, and people who are okay with mixed race marriages wouldn't receive any official scrutiny or notice. But 40 years ago? And there's no review, no way of finding out why a person's score is elevated and they're on a watch list. Was it for mixed-race marriage views in the mid-1960s? And what today might draw official governmental attention? We know that anti-terrorism task forces have been infiltrating and spying on Quaker peace meetings for example. And going to one of those meetings in 2004 will follow you around until 2044, no review, no recourse.

And this is to say nothing of cases of mistaken identity, official misconduct, or some bureaucrat somewhere is having a bad day and takes it out on a name in a file in front of him. And for 40 years that taint follows you around for no real reason. No review, no recourse.

I'm not against counter-terrorist actions. I am against governmental foolery that doesn't accomplish its stated goals, has no means of correcting itself, and carves its mistake into stone.

[pitohui]

24. mistaken identity is the big one, i like what gratuitous says

And this is to say nothing of cases of mistaken identity, official misconduct, or some bureaucrat somewhere is having a bad day and takes it out on a name in a file in front of him. And for 40 years that taint follows you around for no real reason. No review, no recourse

everyone who has a common simple name easily picked up and used by a criminal or terrorist finds their name on the list sooner or later

this happened to my husband, it has happened to david nelson, it has happened to "ed" kennedy, carl lewis, jan adams, pretty much you go down the line of common names that can be picked up and used and easily remembered by a bad guy and there you have it

my husband is now detained every time he tries to re-enter the country, because he has a common name, and this will go on forever, because 40 more years is his expected lifespan

oh they are all very polite and regretful as they tell them that because he has a common name this will follow him for the rest of his life, but what happens one day when he has a tight connection or he meets the less kind and polite bureaucrat who needs to make a quota that day? and this is something we are told we are going to have to plan for, forever

my husband's freedom to travel has been curtailed, for no reason, through no wrong doing of his own except for being born and being given a name

now maybe your name is dweezil moon unit and so you don't care about anyone else but yourself because it will never happen to you -- apparently one person on this thread with a low post count thinks themselves immune to ever being inconvenienced so they don't care about the rest of us -- well i don't find that position worth respecting

a "no fly" list should not be a bald list of common names that a terrorist maybe one time used as an alias, that is wasting everyone's damn time, the terrorist can and does change his name every week, honest people have their names for life

[yewberry]

23. I think you're wrong about how the data can be used.

It doesn't look like it "will only be used for things like deciding to which flights federal air marshalls will be assigned."

From the article:
"The government notice says some or all of the ATS data about an individual may be shared with state, local and foreign governments for use in hiring decisions and in granting licenses, security clearances, contracts or other benefits. In some cases, the data may be shared with courts, Congress and even private contractors.

"Everybody else can see it, but you can't," Stephen Yale-Loehr, an immigration lawyer who teaches at Cornell Law school, said in an interview."
(emphasis mine)

[The Stranger]

13. "[W]hat kind of meal they ordered"? Are vegans more likely to be terrorists?

:wtf:

Are the Democrats going to let this shit continue? Someone pull the funding from all of this totalitarian shit. Anyone?

[nam78_two]

21. Yup...just like the "food not bombs" people are clearly terrorists

because they were offerig vegetarian food to homeless people :eyes:

Who but a terrorist would do that now eh?

[emlev]

22. I think you'd want to avoid ordering the meal that comes with a box cutter hidden inside.

Actually, I'm guessing this is the meal order that would raise your score (and I don't mean cholesterol):

Muslim
(offered on these airlines, according to http://www.airlinemeals.net/indexSpecialmeals.html)
Air Canada
Austrian Airlines
British Airways
Delta
Malév
South African
Thai Airways International
United Airlines

[troubleinwinter]

20. I'm screwn.

I already get pulled out for extra searches because I have taken a number of one-way flights between Phoenix and San Farncisco. (my dad drives to visit me, I ride back with him then fly home). As many as four extra searches for one flight.

I also visited "Communist China" (Beijing) a coupla years ago.

I think I ordered the chicken. :freak:

[Miss Chybil]

25. Oh, you really have to watch out ordering chicken.

That will get you sent straight to Gitmo.