SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Submitted via IRC for SoyCow1984
Federal air marshals have begun following ordinary US citizens not suspected of a crime or on any terrorist watch list and collecting extensive information about their movements and behavior under a new domestic surveillance program that is drawing criticism from within the agency.
The previously undisclosed program, called "Quiet Skies," specifically targets travelers who "are not under investigation by any agency and are not in the Terrorist Screening Data Base," according to a Transportation Security Administration bulletin in March.
The internal bulletin describes the program's goal as thwarting threats to commercial aircraft "posed by unknown or partially known terrorists," and gives the agency broad discretion over which air travelers to focus on and how closely they are tracked.
[...] 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.
Since this initiative launched in March, dozens of air marshals have raised concerns about the Quiet Skies program with senior officials and colleagues, sought legal counsel, and expressed misgivings about the surveillance program, according to interviews and documents reviewed by the Globe.
"What we are doing [in Quiet Skies] is troubling and raising some serious questions as to the validity and legality of what we are doing and how we are doing it," one air marshal wrote in a text message to colleagues.
Source: http://apps.bostonglobe.com/news/nation/graphics/2018/07/tsa-quiet-skies/?p1=HP_SpecialTSA [Ed Note: Not available for all browser modes]
Also at CNN, Fortune, The Verge, and The Hill.
(Score: 5, Touché) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday July 30 2018, @07:11PM (35 children)
The Federal Reserve was a much worse mistake. Or maybe the Monroe Doctrine. Or the Japanese internment camps. Or allowing slavery ever. Or "welfare reform." Or the Iraq War(s). A lot worse has been done, is my point.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 5, Interesting) by fyngyrz on Monday July 30 2018, @07:31PM (1 child)
"Worst" is like a pie. Every slice can be "the worst." All of those things were (are) horrific. But so is what we're going through now. Further, some very bad things are simply precursors, or potential precursors, for other even worse bad things yet to come down the pike.
Falling off a cliff is bad. But the step up to the edge can be just as objectively bad, because without it, there would be no fall.
POV is critical here, both to understand the outlook of the people affected, and to avoid pooh-poohing things that are objectively really bad just because they're not focused, or apparently focused, on us in particular at this point in time, or not quite yet off the cliff.
(Score: 1, Offtopic) by choose another one on Monday July 30 2018, @09:07PM
> Falling off a cliff is bad. But the step up to the edge can be just as objectively bad, because without it, there would be no fall.
Most of falling off a cliff is fine, it's only the bit just before impact that is objectively bad (added possibility of more than one impact as you fall down a cliff).
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Monday July 30 2018, @07:32PM (21 children)
Points for the Federal Reserve. You may well be right with that one.
Monroe Doctrine? Put it into perspective, and you'll see that the absence of the Monroe Doctrine would likely have led to the world's then super powers interfering with every single power and state in the Americas.
Japanese internment? Hmmmm - how bad was that really? How many US citizens died because of that policy? Hell, that's not even a blip on the grand scale of things. Sorry, my give-a-damn isn't even triggered.
"Welfare reform" is a "good thing", IMO. If you're unable to work, then government should maybe ensure that you are taken care of. If you're UNWILLING to work, then you can just fucking starve to death. The welfare system is broken, and it seriously needs meaningful reform. That doesn't mean that I agree with Clinton's approach, or the ideas offered by either party, during any election cycle.
Iraq wars? Sorry - they just don't compare. I argued long and loud against the invasion of Iraq, but that invasion pales in comparison with the idea that Americans have surrendered their freedom and their rights in exchange for some imagined "security".
I'll just point to a Ben Franklin quote - Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
The TSA has taken Franklin's quote to heart. If you willingly enter within their jurisdiction, they know that you have willingly forfeited your liberty, as well as your safety.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Monday July 30 2018, @07:33PM
And, I carefully avoided the issue of slavery in my response. That is far too complicated to address in a three to five minute post.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 30 2018, @08:29PM (14 children)
Oh wow, to imagine that you are an example of a moderate older republican.
I think the thousands of dead innocent Iraqis might object to your 1st world problems.
Internment doesn't even make a blip on your "grand scale"? You're worried about freedom yet one of the most recent and rather massive jailing and abuse of US citizens doesn't even register to you? Wow.
As for welfare, the topic is apparently too complex for your basic world view. The number of true leeches / scammers in welfare programs is basically insignificant and it turns out that all the rules put in by people like you to make sure no one gets a "handout" actually harm the system and create even more problems for society. Like single moms who can't get a part time job because they'll lose their benefits and thus have less money / resources to care for their children. It is backwards and actually discourages the type of personal responsibility your dumb rules are trying to fix. The underlying problem is that your view is "fuck you got mine" so the rules are actually more about trying to discourage welfare use. As so often happens republican strategy is self defeating and worse overall.
Socialize healthcare already!!
(Score: 4, Touché) by Runaway1956 on Monday July 30 2018, @08:56PM (13 children)
Why don't you grab a handful of republicans, and stuff them up your arse?
I've been registered to vote for about 44 years now, and NOT ONCE have I been registered as a member of either party in the US. Which part of "I despise the two party system" do you fail to understand? Only a closed minded, polarized mind which has been molded by that two-party system can see me as a republican. You can run along, and tell your political masters that the brainwashing has been effective on you.
(Score: 0, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 30 2018, @09:29PM (12 children)
I don't bother memorizing every detail of each user here. I'M SORRY YOUR FEELZ GOT SO BUTTHURT!
I see you just got sent into a triggered mess instead of addressing my incredibly valid points regarding your dismissive treatment of real historic problems the US has had. I know you value freedom, but it is amazing how you are so blind to your own words. I point out the problems and you go into full meltdown.
QED the real snowflakes are you old farts who can't stand criticism.
(Score: 3, Troll) by RS3 on Tuesday July 31 2018, @01:23AM (6 children)
Your reaction seems pretty "BUTTHURT".
Personal attacks and insults are what's dividing the US and the rest of the world.
How about someday we all grow up, respect each others opinions whether we agree or not, and try to intelligently interact, collaborate, and come up with some common ground solutions.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 31 2018, @02:03AM (5 children)
Haha, I only used that phrasing since Runaway kicked it off with shoving republican up my ass. I'm done with trying to be 100% civil, sometimes the proper reaction is to call people out on their shit and not baby them in the hopes they'll see your point. It almost never works.
Hmm, in the recent past I just found this little bit of yours.
So apparently you sometimes share your opinions and people find them offensive / trollish. Pot meet kettle. We'll see how long your politeness hangs on in the shitstorm of trolling, stupidity and hypocrisy that occurs around here.
(Score: 2, Troll) by RS3 on Tuesday July 31 2018, @02:29AM (4 children)
I agree, runaway did write that. I kind of skimmed, so I didn't get all of the conversation, and I figured he felt he needed to write that, kind of like you feel you need to.
I strongly disagree with you saying that the proper reaction is to call people out. You may think you're winning some (ridiculous) battle over one person, but to the rest of us who read here hoping to learn something, it's just offensive. It's kind of like picking through rotting food in a dumpster hoping to find something edible. Not really worth the effort.
I came here hoping for more intelligent discourse. I see that people like you aren't willing to rise above the slashdot crowd's culture. Maybe I need to start my own site.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 31 2018, @03:56AM
I don't think you quite understand what is going on in the world right now.
You want civil discussions go to Hacker News, that is the only site I've come across where politeness is somewhat enforced and people truly strive to remain calm and civil.
Runaway quite often spews insulting crap so I don't feel any obligation to coddle his feelings here. He dismissed a ton of horrific crap brought up as examples of things worse than "Homeland Security and TSA were the two single worst mistakes ever made by the US government."
I can only assume you just haven't had enough exposure, but after years hanging around this site I feel no pangs of conscience for being a bit rough on Runaway. Save your criticism for a post more deserving of it, and while you're at it maybe reflect on how your insults are no better just because you're a superior sounding snob.
Don't let the back button break your finger on your way elsewhere.
(Score: 2) by unauthorized on Tuesday July 31 2018, @10:40AM (2 children)
Fuck Beta 2.0 here we come!
(Score: 2) by RS3 on Tuesday July 31 2018, @01:47PM (1 child)
And it's nothing against this amazing site and its owners / admins. I'm here and it's awesome. It's that I have a slightly different view and I think this site would be (much) better if we could collectively vote certain trolls off. Not necessarily the person (as /. had to), but the comments that are truly troll turds. And I know they do that a tiny bit. It's all about where do you draw that line.
So I'm very good at devil's advocacy, and I also see and categorically agree with TMB's philosophy of letting anyone post anything. I'm a huge free-speech advocate. But this is more like a meeting room and someone is disrupting the meeting to the point that it's wasting everyone's time and we're forgetting what we came here for.
But I'm also not so sure about the voting system. I don't think it's fair to downmod someone just because you don't agree with their view. That's the beginning of fascism.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 31 2018, @06:48PM
So we need 100% freedom of speech, except for that annoying guy. He needs to go.
Lawl, don't make absolute statements if you are going to waffle on them within 3 seconds.
(Score: 2, Troll) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday July 31 2018, @02:28AM (4 children)
You don't even bother to read responses to your posts, let alone keep track of the people you are responding to.
That, from my own post, does not contradict anything you have said about the welfare system. Literacy - check your local community college for help with that concept. I am very much aware that the welfare recipient who tries to better him/herself is penalized for taking a job, unless that job pays far more than welfare provides. The system has been built to encourage people to rely on welfare. So, again,
BTW - where do you think the bodies come from that fuel the prison for profit scheme that the US is so famous for? The bodies don't come from families that instill honesty and work ethics into their children. The majority of those bodies come from single mom families, who have been instilled with the proper semi-subservient attitude necessary to push social workers into releasing money. Single mom families most certainly teach reliance on government, as opposed to self reliance. Mom can't be Mom and Dad at the same time, very effectively. Worse, if Dad is in the pen, his only lessons for his children consist of failed methods of "beat the Man".
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 31 2018, @04:07AM (1 child)
"have been instilled with the proper semi-subservient attitude necessary to push social workers into releasing money" uhhh, now you're drifting off the deep end. Nothing like a little criticism to get you to reveal your true feelings.
Welfare was not designed the way it is, it was morphed from something helpful into something twisted because conservatives had to make sure no undeserving people abused the system. I'm glad you're not a full blown RWNJ but I really wish you'd realize that you have quite a bit of culture war propaganda stuffed away in that melon.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday July 31 2018, @02:26PM
May I suggest that you revisit the administration of William Jefferson Clinton, aka, Slick Willy, to see what he did with welfare? See, this is part of our problem in America - your side blames all the evils of government on the other side, while the other side blames all the evils on your side.
Can we all just grow up, and examine the evidence? NEITHER SIDE KNOWS WHAT IN HELL IT IS DOING!!
Ditto with immigration reform, Medicaid, social security - the list goes on and on.
You want to whine and moan about the Republicans? That's cool - but you had better be looking critically at the Dems as well. Otherwise, you're just another partisan horn blower.
(Score: 2) by unauthorized on Tuesday July 31 2018, @11:01AM (1 child)
Why do you assume it's not the economy who is doing it and the welfare isn't compensating for a problem that the free and independent market has created because it creates an efficient pseudo-slavery model like it always does? Ah right, religion. The free market is our lord and savior and Adam Smith is his one and true son that came to save us from the red devil.
Welfare applies to everyone, and only some population groups exhibit the behavior you describe. Therefore it is not welfare that is the root cause, if it did then you would see a more uniform distribution among populations who receive welfare. It might compound an existing maladaptive social behavior among some social groups, but the problem is already there to begin with.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday July 31 2018, @02:39PM
I'm glad that you can see the possibility of negative feedback loops in all of this. And, I'll maintain that single parent homes are one of the contributory feedbacks in the loop. No, of course not all kids from single parent homes are bad. And, of course not all kids from two parent homes are good. But - I wonder - has anyone ever done a survey to see how many of each are incarcerated? Hmmmmm - - -
https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/pji02.pdf [bjs.gov]
Please click the link, there are more interesting bits of information on that page, like racial and ethnic breakdowns of prison population. But those are the highlights you can't deny - single parent homes, and abusive parents really put the hurt on people who may or may not be prone to break the law anyway. Bottom line? Kids need a mom, and kids need a dad. The prison population pretty much proves that. Someone might make a case that if a kid can't have both a mother and a father, then maybe they need Mom more than they need Dad - but I've seen no evidence of that, whether empiric evidence, or psychobabble evidence.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 31 2018, @12:28AM (4 children)
Yes, how bad was it to lock people up in camps for being Japanese? Sure, it may have been a complete and total violation of the Constitution and basic human rights, but at least not many people died!
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 31 2018, @02:52AM
62% [wikipedia.org] of the detainees were Americans.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 31 2018, @10:40AM (2 children)
There were clear examples (from Hawaii) of Japanese-Americans acting in favour of Japan. Sequestering that group in a huge fucking war like WW2 was obviously needed and not doing it would have been bloody stupid. Stealing their property while they were detained was wrong and should have been compensated.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 31 2018, @03:41PM
And you're such a reprehensible piece of garbage that you think that this somehow justifies or gives the government the power to suspend due process rights and place everyone who happens to be Japanese-American in fucking camps? The government had no Constitutional authority to do this. None! The Constitution is the highest law of the land, and you are literally saying it was okay for the government to violate it on a massive scale.
You don't believe in freedom. Move to North Korea, you authoritarian coward.
(Score: 2) by darnkitten on Tuesday July 31 2018, @11:48PM
My Grandma was 2nd-generation German-American: her parents neither spoke nor read English, and lived in a German "colony" in Texas. She and her siblings spoke German amongst each other and at home. Grandma worked as a Harvey Girl, on the railroad, and, railroads being vital for national defense, was investigated by the FBI (understandably), because she wrote her parents in German, and was reported for doing so. Neither she nor any German family she knew were rounded up and placed in internment camps.
And yet, despite comprising 40% of the population in Hawaii (over 150,000), only a few thousand (between 1,200 and 1,800) were detained, as opposed to the mainland, where not a single Japanese national or Japanese-American was found guilty of sabotage, the government rounded up around 120,000 out of a population estimated between 125,000 and 180,000 (Koreans and Taiwanese were often considered ethnically Japanese, and anyone with as little as 1/16th Japanese (Yonsei, having at least one Japanese great-great grandparent), or as one commander put it, having "one drop of Japanese blood..."), was considered Japanese for the purposes of the Executive Order.
The US also had the German-American Bund, the FLNA, Father Coughlin, the Silver Shirts, etc., etc. We had German and Italian saboteurs. We had German- and Italian-Americans in enemy uniforms, fighting on the side of the enemy. Again--German and Italian internment camps? mass round-ups of families? uncompensated confiscations? Not so much. 11,000 Germans (including German Jews) out of 12 million with at least one native-German parent, and 3,000 Italians out of over 5 million, including 600,000 "enemy aliens".
(Score: 2) by realDonaldTrump on Monday July 30 2018, @07:42PM
The question is whether or not we should have been in Iraq in the first place. You have a lot of questions and a lot of people questioning the whole concept of going in in the first place. You see more and more doves, if you call them doves. It wasn’t a mistake to fight terrorism and fight it hard, and I guess maybe if I had to do it, I would have fought terrorism but not necessarily Iraq. But you know, they fulfilled the pledge of finding Saddam Hussein. Can we call that mission accomplished? Why not!
(Score: 5, Insightful) by AthanasiusKircher on Monday July 30 2018, @09:24PM (6 children)
I know I'm going to regret asking, but how was the Federal Reserve a worse mistake? Have you seen the history of banking in the U.S. prior to it? Yes, there are economists who have argued that the Fed's policies in the 1920s significantly contributed to the great depression. But aside from that crisis (and I'm not downplaying it), the Fed led to a century of financial stability much unlike the U.S. had seen prior (and arguably contributed to the U.S. global economic dominance).
Is it perfect? Far from it. And there are arguments that we should have moved to something better by now. But compared to the serious monetary panics (and unless you lived through the Great Depression, it's hard to understand what I mean by "panics") happening every few years that was the norm before, the era since the Fed was formed has been a "walk in the park" for financial markets.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 31 2018, @05:12AM (2 children)
A 1999 article [mises.org] warned:
A 2004 article [newyorker.com] warned:
What this means is that stock prices have been rising on the foundation of nothing more than an increase in the quantity of money.
Eventually [nytimes.com] the warnings were heard.
(Score: 2) by AthanasiusKircher on Tuesday July 31 2018, @12:44PM (1 child)
I explicitly said the Fed isn't the ideal situation, and it makes mistakes... sometimes huge ones. (Though blaming the housing crisis entirely on Fed policy is absolutely not fair, though it was a contributor.)
The question about whether the Fed was a "mistake" is whether we'd have more or less insane monetary panics without it. Given the history of U.S. financial markets before the Fed, I undoubtedly think we would have.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 05 2018, @10:58AM
Who blamed the 2008 crisis entirely on the Federal Reserve? You seem to be attempting a strawman argument.
The Federal Reserve was founded in 1913, when paper money had only been in use in the United States for about 51 years. You write of unspecified "monetary panics." Don't you think it natural that people would be uneasy about the new currency? Since 1913, there have been other changes in the world of finance. In my opinion, the present-day United States resembles its pre-1913 incarnation less than it resembles the developed countries of the present day. After 104 years, none of them have chosen to replicate the Federal Reserve in their own banking systems.
The Federal Reserve is charged with looking after the interests of both private banks and the public. Those interests diverge [businessinsider.com].
(Score: -1, Redundant) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 31 2018, @05:21AM
A 1999 article [mises.org] warned:
A 2004 article [newyorker.com] warned:
Eventually [nytimes.com] the warnings were heard.
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Tuesday July 31 2018, @05:35AM
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLE88E9ICdiphYjJkeeLL2O09eJoC8r7Dc
Of course, MM is a gold bug, but at least that means he has skin in the game.
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Tuesday July 31 2018, @05:47PM
My understanding is that some people are under the delusion that stuffing currency in their mattress is supposed to be a sound investment strategy. And for the real goldbugs, the US dollar has been about to collapse for 30+ years, which puts them in the same category as those who are disappointed the world didn't end last Friday.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday July 31 2018, @04:45AM (2 children)
This is not like the others. It's actually an early piece of anti-colonialism policy - and more effective over the years than most at that. But maybe it was a mistake to oppose the machinations of the European powers in the Americas?
And I would consider the creation of the TSA to be on par or worse than most of the mistakes you mention (certainly worse than the creation of the Federal Reserve and welfare reform). Don't forget that a key part of its creation was the power grab that took over security for every major airport in the US and that it institutionalizes security theater. That alone puts it on par with Japanese internment camps IMHO.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 31 2018, @10:54AM (1 child)
I would argue that the the creation of the Federal Reserve, where the USA handed control of its money to a Jewish Cabal, was a pretty big mistake.
Do you understand how the money supply works now? Every dollar that is created is simply owned by the jewish bankers behind the Fed. When that dollar goes into circulation, it is owed to them, plus interest. It is now provably impossible for the USA to pay off that debt.
I cannot understand why anyone would think it is fair, reasonable, or sane, to do this. Your government, who should be responsible for your currency, instead said "Every coin that is minted, every dollar that is printed, give it to the Jews, and borrow it back. We will be in their debt forever".
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday July 31 2018, @06:18PM
So having your family jewels groped by the airport representative of the Jewish Cabal is better? At least you can hoard gold and bitcoins. Please continue to dig that hole deeper.
Such drama! I suggest as an educational exercise actually trying to prove your assertion and seeing where it fails.