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.

9 of 259 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Practicing for Nation-wide Implementation by Calydor · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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=-
  2. Re:Practicing for Nation-wide Implementation by Iamthecheese · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.
  3. The TSA itself by ArchieBunker · · Score: 5, Informative

    has stopped exactly ZERO terrorist attacks. Congress has flat out asked them and the TSA claims they can't say for security reasons. Yeah that number is zero.

    --
    Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
    1. Re:The TSA itself by w3woody · · Score: 5, Insightful

      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.

    2. Re:The TSA itself by phantomfive · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It seems passengers have stopped most terrorists.....like the shoe bomber.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  4. Re:As someone on the spectrum by hawk · · Score: 5, Funny

    Yeah, they're targeting poorly.

    A *serous* "Quiet Skies program would target screaming children :)

    hawk

  5. Overbooked flights by pgn674 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Maybe sometimes airlines don't overbook their flights. Maybe sometimes when the gate desk claims the flight was overbooked, it's actually that air marshals are forcing their way onto the flight at the last minute.

  6. Re: Practicing for Nation-wide Implementation by careysub · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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
  7. Re: Practicing for Nation-wide Implementation by another_twilight · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.