SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the come-fly-the-discriminatory-skies dept.
TechDirt reports
Thanks to FOIA requests (and lawsuits), the ACLU has gathered enough documents to provide a comprehensive report [PDF] on the worthlessness of the TSA's "Behavioral Detection" program. Meant to give the agency a better way of proactively thwarting acts of terrorism, the program instead opts for lazy profiling, dubious readings of behavioral cues, and junk science.
The documents[1] show the evolution of the behavior detection program and make clear the extent to which it is a program of surveillance of unsuspecting travelers based on unreliable indicators. "Behavior detection officers", some of them dressed in plain clothes, scrutinize travelers at airports for over 90 behaviors that the TSA associates with stress, fear, or deception, looking for what the TSA calls signs of "mal-intent". The reliability of these so-called indicators is not supported by the scientific studies in the TSA files. The behavior detection officers may then engage travelers in "casual conversation" that is actually an effort to probe the basis for any purported signs of deception. When the officers think they perceive those behaviors, they follow the travelers, subject them to additional screening, and at times bring in law enforcement officers who can investigate them further.
The TSA has repeatedly claimed that the behavior detection program is grounded in valid science, but the records that the ACLU obtained show that the TSA has in its possession a significant body of research that contradicts those claims.
[1] Duplicate link in TFA.
[Ed. Note: Non mobile link here to source article here.]
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday February 13 2017, @12:51AM
"a joke would have no effect on the probability that it did contain a bomb."
That seems pretty naive. Cracking a stupid joke shouldn't put you on a terror list, we can agree on that. But, your sense of humor results from a multitude of things. If your background has conditioned you to find certain jokes funny, then *maybe* that same background has also conditioned you to perform certain actions that others would not.
Prison convicts seem to find a lot of things funny, that I do not. I find a lot of things funny as a result of being a veteran, that most civilians only hear as a "whoosh". The medical profession has it's own lingo, and it's own sense of humor. People cracking jokes about bombs at an airport most certainly deserve some examination. But, as I said, the stupid joke doesn't warrant putting them on a no-fly list of suspected terrorists, UNLESS the examination turns up suspicious history.
Don't ignore the stupid joke, but don't make a federal case out of it without investigation first.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 13 2017, @08:46AM
That seems pretty naive.
What evidence do you have that someone telling a joke about a bomb makes it more likely that they actually do have a bomb? Because that's what matters. And even if there is an increase in probability, it still doesn't matter if the likelihood is minuscule. Extremely small risks should be ignored so as to not inconvenience innocent people, who are the vast majority of passengers.
Also, the no-fly list shouldn't exist, or at least not without due process. It's just unconstitutional.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday February 13 2017, @12:17PM
The no-fly list, I almost agree with you. No one knows who is on it, and it has been demonstrated that some pretty lame people have been denied boarding privileges. No one knows how you get on the list. The list is done all wrong, just like the rest of our security theater.
But, there SHOULD be a list. Really, there should be. Known enemies of the state should be barred from flying. That much is pretty simple, really.
No evidence needed regarding the stupid jokes. If you're stupid enough to joke about security in front of an armed man, then you may very well be stupid enough to try to sneak a bomb past him. That is "evidence" enough, in and of itself.
Read Anonymous Coward's link - http://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-safest-airline/#mantle_skin [cbsnews.com]
And, to hell with your interpretation of the constitution. When the bad guys are gunning for you, you shoot the bad guys down, however you can shoot them.
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Tuesday February 14 2017, @11:47AM
Yeah, such as things that are entertaining? Or would you like to give an example of such a certain action that you think is more likely?
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves