While this appears to be focused mostly on airline flights, one must wonder if such lists will also be used when the TSA invades locations outside of airports around the entirety of the United States. After all, at least one college student has been harassed, detained and interrogated when traveling via train simply for engaging in Islamic studies.
It must also be mentioned that the claims that this will increase security are simply laughable since the TSA really has no interest in security evidenced by airport employees being allowed to work without background checks and the fact that an illegal immigrant was somehow able to work as an airport security supervisor for a whopping 20 years without being caught.
The newsletter, released Nov. 19 and brought to my attention by Russia Today, reveals that the TSA is creating a new list of airline passengers who are not concerning enough to justify being placed on the no-fly list.
“As part of the effort to identify individuals that are low risk, TSA also is creating and maintaining a watch list of individuals who are disqualified from eligibility from TSA Pre[check]TM, for some period of time or permanently, because they have been involved in violations of security regulations of sufficient severity or frequency,” the newsletter states.
This comes as the TSA is still grappling with the implementation of their so-called “PreCheck” program aimed at letting certain passengers bypass the typical security screenings most Americans are subjected to.
“Disqualifying violations of aviation security regulations may involve violations at the airport or on board aircraft, such as a loaded firearm that is discovered in carry-on baggage at the checkpoint, or a threat to use a destructive device against a transportation conveyance, facilities, or personnel,” states the newsletter.
This disqualification list “will be generated by TSA’s Performance and Results Information System (PARIS).”
While the above violations seem to be wholly legitimate, it is important to note that “PARIS is an enforcement and inspections system for all modes of transportation for which TSA has security related duties, and maintains records related to the investigation or prosecution of violations or potential violations of Federal, State, local, or international criminal law.”
This seems to indicate that one could get placed on such a list for “the investigation of […] potential violations,” which would mean that one would be guilty until proven innocent.
Since there are so many people mistakenly placed on the no-fly list already, one can reasonably assume that these types of errors will continue.
“In February, the Associated Press revealed that the number of names included on the federal no-fly list created after the September 11 terrorist attacks has doubled in size in just 12 months,” RT points out. “While around 10,000 individuals were barred from flying in 2011, information made available to the AP in February of this year suggested that the number of persons unable to board planes now amounts to roughly 21,000.”
“It’s a secret list, and the government puts people on it without any explanation,” the American Civil Liberties Union’s Nusrat Choudhury told AP. “Citizens have been stranded abroad.”
In one recent case, U.S. citizen Wade Hicks Jr., realized he was on a no-fly list when attempting to visit his wife, a U.S. Navy Lieutenant stationed in Japan.
“By all normal and visible accounts, Mr. Hicks, Jr. appears to be a law abiding member of society,” Canada Free Press reported.
Canada Free Press discovered that, “he is an outspoken ‘patriot’ and openly critical of the NDAA. He is a former talk-show host of a small, local radio station known for its ‘patriotic bias.’ He is a member of ‘Patriots for America’ and the Mississippi Preparedness Project. He is openly vocal about the erosion of our rights – and it certainly looks like he has been proven correct.”
In 2010, The New York Times reported that an 8-year-old was also on the no-fly list while the TSA nonsensically maintained that no children are on the list.
With the myriad cases of individuals improperly placed on the quite massive no-fly list, why would we expect that an even less stringent list would be any different?
No comments:
Post a Comment