updated:US watch list at all time high again! 900,000

[GostHacked]

Maybe...but at least it still keeps Muher Arar out of US air space. Why does he want in so badly?

I was expecting better than this from you. He was not even allowed to be IN the US during his trial. The US could not even extradite him from Canada because they prevented him from attending his own trial/hearing.

Justice has not been served.

[Michael Hardner]

MH: You assume this based on 9/11.

IMO this is purely nonsensical.

The 'foot soldiers' of these groups, can easily be transported via private planes, How is it you think drugs get here?

Many of them fly in, (smuggled) not on commercial airlines, either.

Granted some drugs come via land travel.

But my point is, there is no logical reason to think that the 'foot soldiers' would come in on a commercial flight. Especially in light of security measures, long line ups, strip searches, it would be most inconvenient now wouldn't it??? You know, muck up those plans?

They can more effectively/covertly be flown in privately on a private chartered plane, via a well backed financial network, wether they be, drug cartels or arms dealers. Avoiding the inconvenience and delays of the commercial flight.

Really think about and, then accept the no-fly list is for average jane and joe and is of no real value, except as a "false security" measure.

1) It passes the 'common sense' test.

2) I trust that security professionals know what they're doing.

3) It's not asking too much to be searched before going on a plane.

Do you think we should just throw in the towel ?

Edited November 19, 2007 by Michael Hardner

[Wilber]

1) It passes the 'common sense' test.

2) I trust that security professionals know what they're doing.

3) It's not asking too much to be searched before going on a plane.

Do you think we should just throw in the towel ?

A lot of things don't pass the common sense test but the issue here is the no fly list and a watch list which may well hit a million before this thread has ended, not airport security. That is another issue. How does a no fly list enhance your security when you get on a commercial flight when the authorities admit that some of the worst suspects are intentionally not put on it? It would seem their secrecy trumps your safety in some cases so why would you put so much trust in them?

9/11 happened because the security professionals don't always know what they are doing, sometimes in a big way.

[Wilber]

9/11 happened because the security professionals don't always know what they are doing, sometimes in a big way.

At risk of being accused of being a OB wanabe by quoting my own post.

Ditto for Air India.

Edited November 20, 2007 by Wilber

[bush_cheney2004]

I was expecting better than this from you. He was not even allowed to be IN the US during his trial. The US could not even extradite him from Canada because they prevented him from attending his own trial/hearing.

That was the idea. It worked.

Justice has not been served.

Yes it has....Canada payed Arar $10,000,000 plus expenses. But he can't buy his way off another sovereign's "list".

[Wilber]

That was the idea. It worked.

Yes it has....Canada payed Arar $10,000,000 plus expenses. But he can't buy his way off another sovereign's "list".

And this is supposed to make me feel safer when I get on an aircraft?

[bush_cheney2004]

And this is supposed to make me feel safer when I get on an aircraft?

There is no "safer"....only probability and statistics. You are far more likely to die from cardiovascular disease. The "no-fly" list satisfies one of many political and administrative goals in the wake of 9/11, mostly for domestic American consumption. America didn't need any steenkin' no-fly list to exclude John Lennon, so the concept is hardly new.

[GostHacked]

There is no "safer"....only probability and statistics. You are far more likely to die from cardiovascular disease. The "no-fly" list satisfies one of many political and administrative goals in the wake of 9/11, mostly for domestic American consumption. America didn't need any steenkin' no-fly list to exclude John Lennon, so the concept is hardly new.

It is the false sense of security that so called No Fly list gives to people. And it is entirely for domestic use. No other country as far as I know (other than Britain) has a no fly list.

If the terror no fly list is 750,000, then the amount of people affected are already over 10 million. For I would guess that anyone with that name gets flagged and checked. I am a Chris, so if there was a Chris on that list, then anyone with the name Chris will be flagged and checked. Retarded really, and a waste of good resources that could be more effective in another area.

How many legit 'no flyers' has the US taken into custody? How many of them were charged? How many were sentenced? How many released back into the herd eventhough they are a suspected (for this purpose I will use terrorist) person.

Guilty untill Proven innocent. What is this the USSR?

[bush_cheney2004]

...How many legit 'no flyers' has the US taken into custody? How many of them were charged? How many were sentenced? How many released back into the herd eventhough they are a suspected (for this purpose I will use terrorist) person.

Not many...it isn't a crime not to fly. Nice try anyway.....

Guilty untill Proven innocent. What is this the USSR?

Again...not flying is not a crime..or a right. Haven't you heard? America is evil...so why the hell do you want to fly there? Doesn't make any sense.

[kuzadd]

1) It passes the 'common sense' test.

2) I trust that security professionals know what they're doing.

3) It's not asking too much to be searched before going on a plane.

Do you think we should just throw in the towel ?

MH:

The no-fly list fails the common sense test, in fact, it doesn't seem capable of anything except, passenger harassement, passenger inconvenience, labelling people as terrorists, who have ZERO to do with terrorism. This is common sense?

Prior to the "no-fly" lists are you telling me, seriously, that terrorists were not known, and watched for?? That certainly is not the case. One can check the FBI list , for wanted persons.

for instance.

Has the no-fly list been successful in actually getting any terrorists since it began?

I trust that security professionals know what they're doing.

IMO, misguided trust, for starters and irrelevant, given the fact that so much smuggling can be done via private planes and boats.

Who are "security professionals"??? Minimum wage employees? Illegal aliens? come on!?

here's a recent news story

http://uk.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUKL1125322920071111

Illegal immigrants employed as security guards

Sun Nov 11, 2007 9:47pm GMT

LONDON (Reuters) - The government acknowledged on Sunday that some illegal immigrants had been employed as security guards, but said checks were underway to revoke their licenses and deport them.

Up to 5,000 illegal immigrants have been able to secure security jobs in the UK, including guarding the prime minister's car, the Sunday Mirror reported.

Six illegal immigrants were found to be working for the Metropolitan Police, while others were employed at airports, ports and government buildings, the paper added.

Security professionals are a fantasy, again a false security, you want to BELIEVE in.

It's not asking too much to be searched before going on a plane.

It is if your not a terrorist. Invasion of your privacy and personal space.

It will lead to abuses, in fact it already has.

Do you think we should just throw in the towel ?

On the No-fly list?? YUP!!! It's as useless as is it huge!!!

[GostHacked]

Bush_cheney

Again...not flying is not a crime..or a right. Haven't you heard? America is evil...so why the hell do you want to fly there? Doesn't make any sense.

Actually most of the cases come from within the US's borders. So you are harassing domestic fliers more than having a solid method of catching criminals.

[Wilber]

QUOTE

It's not asking too much to be searched before going on a plane.

It is if your not a terrorist. Invasion of your privacy and personal space.

It will lead to abuses, in fact it already has.

Not so, it's not just terrorists that are a concern. All kinds of loony's and just plain ignorant or uninformed people try to board aircraft with all sorts of restricted, weird and dangerous objects, often out of ignorance over what they are carrying. Security checks are necessary but sometimes they go to the point where they are so overzealous that they become counter productive, causing unnecessary delays and just plain pissing people off for no good reason.

[Oleg Bach]

Not so, it's not just terrorists that are a concern. All kinds of loony's and just plain ignorant or uninformed people try to board aircraft with all sorts of restricted, weird and dangerous objects, often out of ignorance over what they are carrying. Security checks are necessary but sometimes they go to the point where they are so overzealous that they become counter productive, causing unnecessary delays and just plain pissing people off for no good reason.

Security is a booming industry. It has learned to create work and wealth for itself. Always ask the question 'What is motivating the actor in the play, what is the sub-text?" - An overly hyper-vigilant society is a must for the ones who are contracted especally by government to secure us. There is one concern that may be addressed at a later time and that is the rise of private security. Even heads of state in America and Canada use private companies. That is not saying a lot for our tradional police and intelligence forces.

Some may be offended by the occurance at the Vancouver airport in the fact that public securtiy is inferiour - and hiring practices are not what they use to be - Private security hires the best (and toughest) money can buy. Public security runs ads "no experence needed will train". Of course there is no comparison between cops and twits that work for minimum wage - but the difference in quality is becoming less and less defined. The public deserves more intelligent not just more trained security persons.

[kuzadd]

Not so, it's not just terrorists that are a concern. All kinds of loony's and just plain ignorant or uninformed people try to board aircraft with all sorts of restricted, weird and dangerous objects, often out of ignorance over what they are carrying. Security checks are necessary but sometimes they go to the point where they are so overzealous that they become counter productive, causing unnecessary delays and just plain pissing people off for no good reason.

All kinds of loony's and just plain ignorant or uninformed people try to board aircraft with all sorts of restricted, weird and dangerous objects, often out of ignorance over what they are carrying.

this much is true, but ignorance, like the grandma with the plastic knife, is not "terrorism"

but the searching that is going on these days is ridiculous.

Have you read the stories about the gel bras, underwire bras and breastmilk in bottles.???

I am all for safety, but not at the subjugation of the populace.

I also, as stated, have as of yet to see any actual increase in safety , from the so called no-fly list.

As BC said,a "no fly list" was not needed to keep John Lennon restricted.

[kuzadd]

Security is a booming industry. It has learned to create work and wealth for itself. Always ask the question 'What is motivating the actor in the play, what is the sub-text?" - An overly hyper-vigilant society is a must for the ones who are contracted especally by government to secure us. There is one concern that may be addressed at a later time and that is the rise of private security. Even heads of state in America and Canada use private companies. That is not saying a lot for our tradional police and intelligence forces.

Some may be offended by the occurance at the Vancouver airport in the fact that public securtiy is inferiour - and hiring practices are not what they use to be - Private security hires the best (and toughest) money can buy. Public security runs ads "no experence needed will train". Of course there is no comparison between cops and twits that work for minimum wage - but the difference in quality is becoming less and less defined. The public deserves more intelligent not just more trained security persons.

Security is a booming industry. It has learned to create work and wealth for itself.

I could not agree more!

[bush_cheney2004]

I also, as stated, have as of yet to see any actual increase in safety , from the so called no-fly list.

Is that the acceptance criteria...what you can see? A foreign country invokes security prodedures in the wake of a terrorist attack at the behest of an elected government, but you are qualified to pronounce judgement as to the program's efficacy?

When was a commercial jetliner last hijacked in the USA? It was not uncommon long before 9/11.

[kuzadd]

Is that the acceptance criteria...what you can see? A foreign country invokes security prodedures in the wake of a terrorist attack at the behest of an elected government, but you are qualified to pronounce judgement as to the program's efficacy?

When was a commercial jetliner last hijacked in the USA? It was not uncommon long before 9/11.

well it would make sense that, since the no fly list has been in place results should exist , to justify the program.

So what are the numbers of terrorists that have been stopped from flying??

I mean actual real terrorists.

Not little kids, breastfeeding moms and grandma's with plastic picnic knives.

What are the numbers?

Of terrorists?

it would be big news, I am sure, so ........

show us the numbers BC.

[Wilber]

this much is true, but ignorance, like the grandma with the plastic knife, is not "terrorism"

but the searching that is going on these days is ridiculous.

Have you read the stories about the gel bras, underwire bras and breastmilk in bottles.???

I am all for safety, but not at the subjugation of the populace.

I also, as stated, have as of yet to see any actual increase in safety , from the so called no-fly list.

As BC said,a "no fly list" was not needed to keep John Lennon restricted.

It's more than grannies with plastic knives, weapons or things which could be used as weapons. You would be surprised how many people try to get on aircraft with some really nasty stuff in their hand luggage, some of it quite volatile, combustible or corrosive. There have been instances in the past of carry on luggage starting fires in the cabin. There are strict regulations as to what kind and quantity of dangerous goods can be carried on passenger flights as well as how they are packaged and where they are stored. There are severe penalties for intentionally violating those regulations. That is another function of airport security screening.

The ban on liquids was a result of a plot discovered in England and Pakistan to smuggle liquid explosives on ten flights disguised as other substances. As usual when something like this happens, they ban everything initially until they figure out what to target. It caused a major pain in the ass for flight crews for a short time until it was straightened out. People on a six day pattern, who were flying every day would have to buy new toiletries every day.

I don't have to read the stories, I've lived some of them and one of the nice things about retirement is not having to subject myself to them unless it is voluntary. Memories are still fresh of arriving at airport security in uniform with my government issued picture ID, flight plan package under my arm, name and number on the gen dec, copy of my schedule in my fist to confirm that, yes I am operating this flight, to have my nail clippers confiscated with a Monty Python skit running through my brain. "Du has I zay or I vill nibble you. Nibble, nibble, nibble". Standing there taking my shoes off with passengers shaking their heads saying, " you're kidding me". Nope. Wanting to say, "I'm flying the bloody aircraft, if I wanted to destroy the damn thing my first choice wouldn't be blowing my own freaking feet off". But you can't and they are only doing their job as they have been instructed so you smile, play the game and carry on.

If security agencies are not going to put the names of some of their most dangerous suspects on no fly lists, one has to wonder what use they are from a safety point of view. The irony is that people like John Lennon who was no threat to anyone are the ones most likely to appear on these lists. Bear in mind that airlines have their own no fly lists of people who have caused them so much trouble in the past that they refuse to let them on their aircraft.

[Brain Candy]

its possible most are people who either bought/ took out the wrong book or went to the wrong website.

[CandianWatcher]

Maybe...but at least it still keeps Muher Arar out of US air space. Why does he want in so badly?

Because the man is innocent and innocent, free men should have the right to travel. Ever since 9/11 people have given up more rights for "security". In fact what you are giving up is your freedoms to get in return a false sense of security.

Put it into proportion, you have a higher risk of being killed in your every day life routine, by bus, truck, car, accident of some sort than by a terrorists. Do you really think giving up all your freedoms in the name of security is really worth the price?

[bush_cheney2004]

Because the man is innocent and innocent, free men should have the right to travel. Ever since 9/11 people have given up more rights for "security". In fact what you are giving up is your freedoms to get in return a false sense of security.

So what if Arar is "innocent"....he doesn't have the right to travel to another sovereign state without permission. However, he can travel many other places with your money. If he shows up again in the USA, send him back to Syria.....I hear it's nice this year.

Put it into proportion, you have a higher risk of being killed in your every day life routine, by bus, truck, car, accident of some sort than by a terrorists. Do you really think giving up all your freedoms in the name of security is really worth the price?

I haven't given up anything....especially "all my freedoms". But your concern is noted (but note that I still have more "rights" than you do in Canada.)

[Higgly]

So what if Arar is "innocent"....he doesn't have the right to travel to another sovereign state without permission. However, he can travel many other places with your money. If he shows up again in the USA, send him back to Syria.....I hear it's nice this year.

Syria is a wonderful place to visit. So many historical sites. So much geographic beauty. Unless of course you've been sent there because you are one of the 93,000 people that George Bush's election machine has determined might get the Republican Party re-elected.

I haven't given up anything....especially "all my freedoms". But your concern is noted (but note that I still have more "rights" than you do in Canada.)

Well, sport. Here's the thing...

We don't give a good goddamn about your rights. In fact you can take your rights, roll them into a tube the size of a pencil, and shove them where the sun don't shine.

Sound familiar?

[bush_cheney2004]

Syria is a wonderful place to visit. So many historical sites. So much geographic beauty. Unless of course you've been sent there because you are one of the 93,000 people that George Bush's election machine has determined might get the Republican Party re-elected.

Nice to read that the RCMP supported the "Republican" party.

Well, sport. Here's the thing...

We don't give a good goddamn about your rights. In fact you can take your rights, roll them into a tube the size of a pencil, and shove them where the sun don't shine.

Sound familiar?

No need for that...I can handle a lot more than a wimpy pencil ! And I wouldn't even whine about torture.

Edited December 22, 2007 by bush_cheney2004

[Higgly]

.. And I wouldn't even whine about torture.

OK. Why don't we start by torturing you?

[kuzadd]

http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2008/0...900000-nam.html

The FBI now keeps a list of over 900,000 names belonging to known or suspected terrorists, the American Civil Liberties Union said today.

If that number is accurate, it would be an all-time high, exponentially more than the 100,000 names on the list several years ago. But the number needs to be taken with a grain of salt: after all, the ACLU doesn't keep the list, the FBI does, and the bureau doesn't generally like to talk about it. (Indeed, the FBI has not yet responded to a request for comment for this post.)

But if the ACLU's figure isn't accurate, it's also unlikely to be off by that much. Last September, the ACLU notes, the Department of Justice's Inspector General reported the FBI watch list was at 700,000 names, and growing at 20,000 names per month.

I recall posting that all time high as reported

confirmation of the estimate

http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2008/0...tch-list-a.html

The FBI's terror watch list contains roughly 900,000 records, a bureau spokesman said Thursday, confirming an earlier estimate by the American Civil Liberties Union.

so the amount was reported at 700,000 in Sept 07, growing by 20,000 names per months.

maybe it's not quite 900,000 maybe it's 820,000, but 20,000 a month, wow!

who are all these 'Terrorists'?