FBI Watch Lists

Remove all ads!

We all know by now the story how security meased failed to stop the Christmas Day bomber to get on a plane. The US has a "no fly list" of about 2,500 people, and another 13,000 people on a "watch list" who have to be patted down and get aggressive questioning before being allowed to board. The problem is, the watch list doesn't include a description of the person, just a name. So if you happen to share a name with someone on the watch list, you get patted down and extensively questioned.

In the NYT story I linked below, they highlight the case of Michael Hicks, who happens to share a name with a person on the list. Michael Hicks is 8. He was first patted down at an airport when he was 2. Evidently, whille there are about 13,000 people on the watch list, a search through a national phone book reveals that there are over 80,000 other people who share a name with someone on the list, but have done nothing wrong.

OK, that's an inconvenience to be sure, but the most disturbing part of the article is one guy who was having difficulty getting on planes because he had the same name as someone on the list. He flies a lot, and it got to be such a nuisance, he decided to get his name legally changed, and since then, he has had no problems. And THAT'S the problem I have. If the watch list can be circumvented simply by changing one's name, WTF is the purpose of even having a list?

Linky.

 

I was reading about this on MSNBC today as well. One question? If his father is also named Michael, why has the father only been stopped once and the kid gets screened every time?

 

A no-fly-list is a government measure that, by granting or denying the possibility to fly, directly impacts and limits an individual's rights.

Sometimes something like that may be necessary, even though the pertinent question remains what makes a person so dangerous that he cannot bee allowed to fly even after a thorough security check. There aren't that many people who habitually vandalise aircraft in flight. If they can predict that a person is too dangerous to fly then they probably know enough to be able to arrest him as well, so why a no fly list? But I digress ...

But here's my problem with the no-fly-lists, and it's a serious one: Apparently, TRIP, meant to offer recourse, doesn't work well.

So basically there is no really effective legal recourse short of going to court in the US once you happen to be on a list.

And only in August 2008 a ruling in California stated that no fly list inclusion cases can be heard in federal court. That's after the ever expanding no-fly-lists have been used for only about seven years since 9/11.

Access to effective legal recourse is one of the things that makes the difference between a authoritarian state and a state protecting citizen rights. It's a Kafkaesque travesty, and not even one that works particularly well. Patting down a two year old is a stellar example of wasting effort without any concrete security benefits.

 

Well, technically, it's the watch list - the no-fly list is a lot shorter list, and it provides more ways to identify an individual beyond their name. If you're on the no-fly list, and you try to board a plane, chances are you're getting arrested. Someone on the watch list can still board a plane.