Slashdot Mirror
Boston Globe Outs Secret TSA Tracking Program 'Quiet Skies' At Airports (bostonglobe.com)
The Boston Globe reports of a previously undisclosed program, called "Quiet Skies," that targets travelers who "are not under investigation by any agency and are not in the Terrorist Screening Data Base." The insights come from a TSA bulletin in March that describes the program's goal as thwarting threats to commercial aircraft "posed by unknown or partially known terrorists. The program "gives the agency broad discretion over which air travelers to focus on and how closely they are tracked," reports The Boston Globe. From the report: But some air marshals, in interviews and internal communications shared with the Globe, say the program has them tasked with shadowing travelers who appear to pose no real threat -- a businesswoman who happened to have traveled through a Mideast hot spot, in one case; a Southwest Airlines flight attendant, in another; a fellow federal law enforcement officer, in a third. It is a time-consuming and costly assignment, they say, which saps their ability to do more vital law enforcement work. TSA officials, in a written statement to the Globe, broadly defended the agency's efforts to deter potential acts of terror. But the agency declined to discuss whether Quiet Skies has intercepted any threats, or even to confirm that the program exists.
Already under Quiet Skies, thousands of unsuspecting Americans have been subjected to targeted airport and inflight surveillance, carried out by small teams of armed, undercover air marshals, government documents show. The teams document whether passengers fidget, use a computer, have a "jump" in their Adam's apple or a "cold penetrating stare," among other behaviors, according to the records. Air marshals note these observations -- minute-by-minute -- in two separate reports and send this information back to the TSA. All US citizens who enter the country are automatically screened for inclusion in Quiet Skies -- their travel patterns and affiliations are checked and their names run against a terrorist watch list and other databases, according to agency documents. The bulletin highlights 15 rules used to screen passengers. If someone is selected for surveillance, a team of air marshals will be placed on the person's next flight.
Already under Quiet Skies, thousands of unsuspecting Americans have been subjected to targeted airport and inflight surveillance, carried out by small teams of armed, undercover air marshals, government documents show. The teams document whether passengers fidget, use a computer, have a "jump" in their Adam's apple or a "cold penetrating stare," among other behaviors, according to the records. Air marshals note these observations -- minute-by-minute -- in two separate reports and send this information back to the TSA. All US citizens who enter the country are automatically screened for inclusion in Quiet Skies -- their travel patterns and affiliations are checked and their names run against a terrorist watch list and other databases, according to agency documents. The bulletin highlights 15 rules used to screen passengers. If someone is selected for surveillance, a team of air marshals will be placed on the person's next flight.
Socialism does not have to equal a fascist police state. Your entire post is on point and insightful, but you should really have left the socialist tangent out.
-=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
âoeamong other behaviors,âoe
such as...generally disliking the TSA?
You're right about everything but the word "socialist". Replace it with the word "authoritarian". The US is by far the least socialist western nation, but it is getting more authoritarian by the day.
If video games influenced behavior the Pac Man generation would be eating pills and running away from their problems.
has stopped exactly ZERO terrorist attacks
It's harder to tell how many it discouraged...
Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
Yep, tell that to Sweeden, Norway, Denmark, Finland, Canada, etc.
Ignorant trumptard.
I'd rather they spend/waste their money on expensive, labor intensive HUMINT than spend it on more databases, better nudie scanners, etc and so forth. If they want to send a bunch of agents on wild goose chases writing reports, so be it. At least they might be there when someone gets blind drunk on a flight and starts harassing other passengers.
Over 90% of all of the terrorist attacks in the West in the last several years have been perpetrated by "known wolves." These are usually immigrants who are known to the authorities for being extremely radical and with some sort of criminal history that suggests the likelihood they may end up acting on their rhetoric is much higher than 0%.
Simple solution to this whole problem:
1. Deport all imams that have ever legitimized jihad against the West.
2. Deport all immigrants who ever threaten violence against their host nation and/or its government.
3. Deport all immigrants who advocate common felonies against their host nation.
4. Deport all immigrants who advocate violence toward our allies.
5. Deport all immigrants who advocate violence against the civilian populations of even our enemies.
6. Deport all immigrants convicted of any felony or who are charged with many and plea bargain down w/ any sort of deal where the felonies will be reinstated if probation is violated.
We don't need secret tracking systems, mass surveillance, etc. We need zero tolerance and limited due process for foreigners who are in any way a net negative if they stay in our nations.
Exactly.
The two changes made immediately after 9/11 which had the biggest effect on airline safety was (a) hardened cockpit doors, and (b) changing airline passenger awareness on how to respond to a terrorist--from one of being a passive passenger during a hijacking to actively resisting the terrorist.
All the rest has been a waste of money, time and effort with "security theater" as the government plays cops and robbers on the taxpayer dime.
On 8 February 1950, East Germany saw the establishment of the Ministry for State Security (Ministerium für Staatssicherheit), commonly known as the Stasi.[7] The Stasi sought to "know everything about everyone".[8] Its annual budget has been estimated at approximately $1 billion.[8] Out of a population of 16 million, the agency kept files on nearly 6 million of its citizens.[8] The Stasi had 90,000 full-time employees who were assisted by 170,000 full-time unofficial collaborators (Inoffizielle Mitarbeiter); together these made up 1 in 63 (nearly 2%) of the entire East German population. Together with these, a much larger number of occasional informers brought up the total to 1 per 6.5 persons.[9][10][11][12][13][14] People in East Germany were subjected to a variety of techniques, including audio and video surveillance of their homes, reading mail, extortion, and bribery.[15]
If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
It seems passengers have stopped most terrorists.....like the shoe bomber.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
has stopped exactly ZERO terrorist attacks
It's harder to tell how many it discouraged...
Just like it's hard to say how many it encouraged to do a terrorist attack. I'm certain that some people after being molested have thought about it.
No, capitalism is the most generous form of governance there is. You want to enforce charity of others by mandating fees and taxes be placed upon them, and if they don't comply, jail, and if they don't comply. Death. Don't come here pretending socialism is kind and just and like a "wider family". Socialism is enforced charity with others who you may or may not feel charitable for. That's coercion, any way you put it.
I'm sorry, when's the last time anyone in a civilized country was executed for not paying their taxes?
-=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
Well, then you must believe that the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (North Korea to you) is really a democracy, because its in its name.
The Nazi Party had "Socialist" in its name essentially for the same reason that "Democratic" is in the name of North Korea -- it was a popular marketing term, regardless of validity.
Here is a good discussion of this issue.
Starships were meant to fly, Hands up and touch the sky - Nicky Minaj
capitalism is the most generous form of governance there is
There's no way I can parse that that makes sense. Strictly, capitalism is defined by private individuals owning/controlling the means of manufacture (trade/profit).
I cannot understand where, in that, generosity fits. In as much as capitalism is often associated with some form of free market it's competitive. Still not generous. Please, can you clarify?
You want to enforce charity of others by mandating fees and taxes be placed upon them
Language is important. You call it 'charity' when you describe taxes being used for people other than those that paid them. The problem with a strictly personal and competitive system is that there are numerous cases where individuals are bad at making rational decisions (cognitive biases like discounting future negatives) or where individuals, acting rationally, can cause themselves harm that could be avoided by acting in concert (tragedy of the commons). There are economies of scale that can be achieved where people contribute to a pool and a centralised system provides services or utilities where profit based competition would degrade service (healthcare, utilities) and that's before we look at social contracts and whether being born and raised in a country whose previous generations have provided you with peace, prosperity, education and health obligates you to at least leave the system no worse for your participation.
Call that 'charity' if you will, but you're being either obtuse or misleading.
'Socialism', in its pure form is just as toxic as 'capitalism'. Both need to be regulated and restricted, those countries with the longest history of high standards of living for most of the population have a mix of socialist policies along side of capitalism.
Noting that socialism fails at extremum is trivial. Your inability to consider anything less than 'pure' socialism is a kind of blindness that I can only presume is some relic of the US school system.
I think about that, what if the the US really is an authoritarian police state?
If it is, why doesn't it feel like that all the time? I mean, how do you explain how easy it is to get a gun, go places, bitch about the government, etc?
Am I just a lucky member of the police state's favored class? Were there people like me in East Germany or wherever who never really worried about losing their privileges, etc? I mean, I worry we're becoming more like a police state, but not that we really are in one now, but that's just my perception more than some scientific measure of the police state-ness of the US.
But does make me think about the role of perception, and if a police state is "done well" does that mean most people can't tell? Is that how it always is?