The U.S. government is rapidly expanding the number of names it accepts for inclusion on its terrorist watch list, with more than 1.5 million added in the last five years, according to numbers divulged by the government in a civil lawsuit.
About 99 percent of the names submitted are accepted, leading to criticism that the government is "wildly loose" in its use of the list. From the article:
Those included in the Terrorist Screening Database could find themselves on the government's no-fly list or face additional scrutiny at airports, though only a small percentage of people in the database are actually on the list.
It has been known for years that the government became more aggressive in nominating people for the watch list following al-Qaida operative Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab's failed effort to blow up an airplane over Detroit on Christmas Day 2009. But the numbers disclosed by the government show submissions have snowballed. In fiscal 2009, which ended Sept. 30, 2009, 227,932 names were nominated to the database. In fiscal 2010, which includes the months after the attempted Christmas bombing, nominations rose to 250,847. In fiscal 2012, they increased to 336,712, and in fiscal 2013 - the most recent year provided - nominations jumped to 468,749.
The government disclosed the figures in a civil lawsuit out of Virginia challenging the constitutionality of the no-fly list.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by TGV on Sunday July 20 2014, @05:01PM
Well, perhaps not yet, but at this rate, it won't be long before the terrorists can swing the vote, and then they'll have won. Officially.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 20 2014, @07:23PM
Indeed. Sounds like a pretty useless list to me by now.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 21 2014, @01:06AM
By now? It was a useless list ten years ago. Where the fuck you been, bro?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 21 2014, @11:40AM
So ten years ago it was useless, while by now it's pretty useless. That's progress, isn't it? ;-)
(Score: 2, Interesting) by wantkitteh on Sunday July 20 2014, @07:25PM
No, they've definitely won already. 0.47% of the entire population of America has been added to that list in the last 5 years. They've made America afraid of it's own shadow.
(Score: 2) by davester666 on Sunday July 20 2014, @07:35PM
Sorry, you aren't allowed to vote if you are on the list.
(Score: 5, Funny) by BsAtHome on Sunday July 20 2014, @05:21PM
Wouldn't it be easier just to put everybody on the list? That would save everyone involved a lot of work and surely reduce expenditures. There are only 7.[something]*10^9 people, which should be just a small database to today's standards. When everybody is on the list you can also do away with the complexity of the programming and the function "bool isOnList(person) {return true;}" would definitely speed up all queries.
While they are at it, maybe they should add a random generator for the drone-controlling systems too. That way all casualties would be evenly distributed across the globe and no one can say they are taking a particular side. The perfect defence for "we are blindly serving justice where no justice was served before". That should make the government a lot more respectable. Then again, a slight bias towards coordinates 38.8951100N, 77.0363700W would not hurt that much.
(Score: 2) by Theophrastus on Sunday July 20 2014, @05:52PM
i believe that amounts to the policy driving the NSA's current efforts (deducting only a very small number of people, like the current head of the NSA)
(connections can be made to threats only after we have all the information to make connections to the threats..)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 20 2014, @06:24PM
The first coordinate is off by 0.002 degrees but what the hey! :D
Fed the coordinates to Google hoping it would identify them properly
and it did!!! :D
I thought those coordinates pointed at those 2 huge mirrored glass
buildings in Fort Meade, Maryland. XD
However, it is SINCERELY hoped that nothing bad ever happens at the
corrected coordinates or everybody on Planet Earth could have a VERY
BAD DAY! o_O;
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 20 2014, @06:37PM
Nah, it would be best just to have a database of EVERYBODY on Planet Earth
who is some sort of government official or public safety officer.
Basically this list consists of the following:
-- All national defence staff, police officers,
firemen, ambulance and medical staff
-- All government officials of any kind from ward aldermans
all the way up to any and all heads of state (crowned
rulers, presidents, prime ministers, etc.)
This list is THE white list. If you are not on it, you
could be a suspect. If there is some sort of 'inside job',
it would be drastically easier to hunt down the guilty
party/parties with this list. But because of this, that
is why they are doing such a list this way so the
chances of a rogue head of state getting on this list
would be slim to none unless somebody else knew and
'ratted them out' to the proper authorities who could
deal with them properly.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 20 2014, @09:03PM
> Wouldn't it be easier just to put everybody on the list?
We have met the enemy, and he is us.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Horse With Stripes on Sunday July 20 2014, @10:06PM
We have met the enemy, and he is the government.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 21 2014, @01:40AM
What a pedestrian response. Could you be any more dull?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 21 2014, @10:33PM
In theory, in the US, the Government is us. So I'm not sure of the point. If what you mean is the reality of what I'll call is The P2000 (i.e. 1000 richest corporations + 1000 richest families in the US), you should probably state it as the Plutocracy so as not to get it confused with the theoretic Government.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by TrumpetPower! on Sunday July 20 2014, @05:52PM
If there really were a million and an half terrorists in the country, this place would be a smoking ruin. There's no way a society could function if domestic terrorists outnumbered active military service members -- especially considering how huge our military is.
If "they" have enough reason to suspect somebody of being not only a terrorist but such a threat that pre-flight screening isn't enough to keep them from doing something nefarious, then "they" have more than enough reason to bring a successful conspiracy charge against this arch supervillain. Or, what -- they don't think this same terrorist would just as soon blow up a bridge during rush hour, or contaminate a municipal water supply, or overpower security at a nuclear power plant, or blow up a dam, or some other such dirty deed?
The only people who could possibly be justified as belonging on a terrorist watch list of such overreaching scope are the people who maintain the list. Either add these millions of people to the FBI's Most Wanted list, or get rid of the list entirely.
b&
All but God can prove this sentence true.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 20 2014, @07:04PM
> If there really were a million and an half terrorists in the country,
Article does not say it, but I got the impression it is an international list.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Ryuugami on Sunday July 20 2014, @07:23PM
I'd say it's only a matter of time.
If a shit storm's on the horizon, it's good to know far enough ahead you can at least bring along an umbrella. - D.Weber
(Score: 2, Informative) by tftp on Sunday July 20 2014, @09:03PM
they don't think this same terrorist would just as soon blow up a bridge during rush hour, or contaminate a municipal water supply, or overpower security at a nuclear power plant, or blow up a dam, or some other such dirty deed?
The terrorist only needs to grab his own kitchen knife and kill a stranger in the street. That's not a very difficult thing to do even for a poorly trained terrorist. However the resulting losses (1.5 million, not even counting the terrorists themselves) will exceed the losses sustained in World War II [wikipedia.org] (1,076,245 men dead or wounded.) Given extra high sensitivity to losses nowadays, the country will be on its knees, shivering in "safe rooms," way before the count exceeds 10,000.
(Score: 2) by ticho on Monday July 21 2014, @05:26AM
Surely a coordination is needed, though, otherwise the knife-wielding terrorists would end up killing other knife-wielding terrorists, thus lowering the effectiveness of the whole plan. I say the only thing standing between population and this mayhem is the NSA, clamping down Internet communications, and with this many terrorists, they could use funding increase!
(Score: 1) by tftp on Monday July 21 2014, @06:43AM
Surely a coordination is needed, though, otherwise the knife-wielding terrorists would end up killing other knife-wielding terrorists
If there are 1.5M terrorists among 350 million citizens in total, probability of striking a fellow terrorist is a mere 0.4%, far lower than the probability of failing to do the deed for one reason or another. That is if we presume that there is absolutely no way for one terrorist to avoid people who look like they might be on the same side. Instead they may pick someone else, who is very unlikely to be one of them. Age and gender are among those characteristics.
(Score: 2) by ticho on Monday July 21 2014, @01:21PM
I see that you have put a lot of thought into this plan. I will be watching news with interest, barricaded at home. :-)
(Score: 4, Informative) by Hairyfeet on Monday July 21 2014, @02:05AM
The thing you are missing is that by current thinking anyone who doesn't support the government unconditionally is a possible terrorist. Don't support backhanded trade deals like NAFTA and TPP? Terrorist. Don't support endless wars? terrorist. Don't support the TSA goons treating you like dirt and stealing from your stuff? Terrorist. Don't support corp welfare, trillion dollar turkeys like the F35, ever held up a sign anywhere that disagreed with the government? you get the idea.
ACs are never seen so don't bother. Always ready to show SJWs for the racists they are.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 21 2014, @11:52AM
About your signature:
OK, you might not see this (but then, you probably get a message that someone answered your post), but ...
(1) You seem to be completely unaware of the concept that an AC might get moderated up to score 2 or higher.
(2) If it were only your unwillingness to lower your overall score, I'm pretty sure there's the possibility in the settings to give AC posts an extra score adjust.
(3) I hope you don't moderate. Moderation should always be done at -1.
(4) At +2, you not only don't see unmoderated ACs, you also don't see unmoderated logged-in people unless they've got a karma bonus.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Monday July 21 2014, @02:35PM
Now you understand the beautiful and perfect logic of doublethink. You agree with the government, and always have. It's the only way to prove you love Big Brother.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2) by RamiK on Monday July 21 2014, @05:08PM
1500000/5 = 300,000 per year or about 820 new entries a day with 99% acceptance... Google says there are 370 employees working in that Terrorist Screening Center ( http://iaclea.org/visitors/events/conference/TSCpresentation-Condensed.pptx [iaclea.org] ) but that document is undated... Regardless, the Wikipedia entry makes it sound like there's some (typical) bureaucratic overhead and some other departments for taking calls from other agencies and so on... So the employees that are actually dedicated to the screening - the "Nominations Group" - is probably about a quarter of the entire staff...
So, say you have 100 people processing that list daily... It doesn't sound unreasonable to me for each employee to review 8.5 cases a day and go through some internal review process with a senior staffer...
My only concern is that 10-20 cases a day sounds like a reasonable number for a single individual to do... Meaning Parkinson's law might be in effect and is pushing no. of employees X 10 (to 20) entries into the database regardless of any other concern. ;)
compiling...
(Score: 4, Insightful) by GWRedDragon on Sunday July 20 2014, @07:16PM
Let's see...depriving people of a basic right (travel), by fiat, in secret, with no trial or possibility for appeal. Yep, definitely constitutional.
Shit, I probably just earned myself a place on the list. Oops.
[Insert witty message here]
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Monday July 21 2014, @02:37PM
Every patriotic American ought to aspire to get himself on the no-fly list. Enough of us no-fly, then everyone no fly. Tyranny only works when most people play along.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by tathra on Sunday July 20 2014, @07:17PM
sheesh, that makes it ridiculously easy to hassle people. all you have to do is report people you dont like as "terrorists", and BOOM, instant hassle for the rest of their life and probably a one-way trip to gitmo before 2020 (because if they're on the list, its obviously because they're actually a terrorist).
is there a way to 'report' people anonymously? it would be pretty funny if police and politicians started getting reported en masse -- not that i'm advocating anyone actually do that, i mean, i would never entertain the idea of turning their own authoritarian system against them or trying to subvert justice! on a related note, i expect to see more "snitch on your neighbor"-type messages in the future. its already out there, but i expect it to become much more overt in the next few years.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by Ryuugami on Sunday July 20 2014, @07:30PM
You're forgetting something important: the "degree of separation" doctrine.
If you know enough about someone to report them as terrorist, then you're obviously at least acquaintances. Which means you're only one degree of separation from a terrorist. Which means you're at least 72% terrorist yourself. See? The logic's bulletproof.
If a shit storm's on the horizon, it's good to know far enough ahead you can at least bring along an umbrella. - D.Weber
(Score: 4, Informative) by tathra on Sunday July 20 2014, @07:45PM
true, but thats only a barrier the first time, and if you're already falsely on the list, you have nothing to lose and everything to gain. with the whole "3 degrees of separation" thing, there's a good chance you're already under investigation, since if you pick up your prescriptions from the same pharmacy or get your oil changed by the same mechanic or are on the same FedEx route, you're within 3 degrees.
(Score: 1) by harmless on Sunday July 20 2014, @09:48PM
If you actually speak to the same person as the 'terrorist', that's only two degrees of separation.
The third degree also includes everyone you interact with.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 20 2014, @10:11PM
i did say "within 3 degrees", not "exactly at 3 degrees".
(Score: 3, Funny) by BsAtHome on Sunday July 20 2014, @11:09PM
With three degrees of separation you have quite a few people. Lets project this list onto the US. One person "knows" about 150 others. The uniqueness factor we'll set at 5%. The first degree of separation results in 150*0.05*1.5e6~11.3e6. The second degree amounts to ~84.4e6 and the third degree of separation is 632.8e6 persons.
That would suggest there are more terrorists in the US than there are citizens in that country. Is clearly shows that the US must have an excess group of ~300e6 classifiable as illegal immigrants that cannot be up to any good. That should sum it up quite nicely.
I was always sure that nothing good could come from that side of the pond, a country filled with terrorists and illegal immigrants. My simple calculations are sure proof of that position.
(Score: 4, Funny) by Adamsjas on Monday July 21 2014, @01:09AM
And yet you post on the same suspect website with the rest of us terrorists?
Welcome to the list you filthy terrorist, come on in, the beer is in the keg in the bathtub, weed over by that smoky corner, pizza is on the way, its being delivered with by the SWAT guys. (oh, don't worry, those dudes are on the list too). Party on.
(Score: 2) by BsAtHome on Monday July 21 2014, @09:45AM
I've been found guilty by association for many things, including association with this site. And, in the good tradition of applied self-justice in a self-censored manner, have been convicted to death by old age.
Don't mind if I take a pint... Cheers.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 21 2014, @07:40AM
Ok.. so now we know of the existence of a list.
With over 1.5 million people on it.
A list of people some TLA keeps top secret... people who are likely to be done away with should the need arise. People being watched like a hawk. Angela Merkel was obviously on some list. She sure didn't take kindly to being watched.
How much mayhem do you think a real terrorist could cause by "leaking" a list with the names of a bunch of influential people on it, and making it look as if it came from a TLA? I am talking 1%'ers here - you know the people who have enough resources to cause significant trouble for TLA's if they took a hankering to do so.
The burden would fall on the TLA to disavow it, and right now their credibility is about nil. Would you trust anything a TLA said? All it would take is a list to be released from a more credible source, and there will be so much distrust amongst a bunch of very powerful people. Very few people know the truth, and even fewer will believe even the ones who know the truth.
This kind of suspense is going to make the Roswell alien saucer crash look tame. Was or was there not an interplanetary visitor to earth? Is or is there not the CEO of Monsanto on the list? Who knows? One day a bunch of men carrying guns or drones will be dispached to carry out orders...What are those orders? Who knows?
Imagine you are one of the 1%'ers. You control a very powerful corporate empire. And you have seen your name on a list of people to be done away with. And you know this is exactly what you have done, yourself, when determining your own corporate structures.... Would you let the guy you were fixing to lay off know about it? Especially if you needed his co-operation until D-Day?
Can you really trust that smiling face and outstreched hand hankering for a shake?
We are digging ourselves in deep here, fellas...
(Score: 2) by tathra on Monday July 21 2014, @06:33PM
its a nice idea, but the people buying laws are smart enough to know that they would never be on the list they paid to create, at least not any time soon. besides, they have private jets and all that, so its not like they'd experience anywhere near the same amount of hassle as the plebes, and if they did all it'd take is a large "donation" to a congressman, senator, police chief, etc, to prevent anymore hassle in the near future.
leaking information that they had a hand in creating the lists would likely fail to create backlash as well since many people are very much in favor of mass surveillance and the police state.
(Score: 0, Offtopic) by jelizondo on Sunday July 20 2014, @10:09PM
How does one go about getting a name on the list?
I'm thinking my ex-wife belongs on it...
For the humor impaired... the above is a joke.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 21 2014, @12:46AM
> For the humor impaired... the above is a joke.
If you don't have enough faith in your joke telling abilities and your audience, then don't bother telling the joke because that means you think the joke isn't right for this time and place anyway.
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 21 2014, @01:04AM
Obama does exactly what Bush did, and more of it.
That's it! I'm on the list!
(Score: 1) by ibennetch on Monday July 21 2014, @02:35AM
Commenting to remove a mistake I made moderating. I tried to warn you this comment wasn't worth looking at.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 21 2014, @02:59AM
i looked at the trap ray
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 21 2014, @09:26AM
Unfortunately, that trick doesn't work any more. Commenting won't undo moderation. [soylentnews.org]