CNN Journalist Drew Griffin Put on TSA Terrorist List After Critical Reports

[Parker2112]

Whats the big deal with big govt? Give em all the damn power they want to keep us safe...they can be trusted, right?

0qr5EsCoz5s

[Parker2112]

udFpYGvUrCk

[ChumpDumper]

Two years after this was alleged?

Thanks, Scoop!

[Parker2112]

Two years after this was alleged?

Thanks, Scoop!

Its relevant because many posters in this forum still wear blinders. We even had posters saying that we should shut up and trust the TSA on the new security measures :lol

Sheepish trust in Big Brother is still a daily occurence around these parts, Chump.

[Parker2112]

Didn't the HSA just put a watch on Matt Drudge after he pushed for the Opt Out Day? Quite Possibly.

http://dailycaller.com/2010/12/03/tsa-accused-of-adding-critical-reporters-to-terror-watch-list/

http://www.unitedliberty.org/articles/7463-bob-barr-files-foia-request-with-tsa

http://www.unitedliberty.org/articles/7426-oppose-tsa-procedures-youre-an-extremist

Still pretty goddamn timely Chump.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/12/bob-barr-probe-manipulation-tsa-opt-protest/

[Parker2112]

Argument that TSA new measures are unconstitutional:


Broadly, U.S. courts have held that “routine” searches of all travelers can be conducted at airports as long as they don’t threaten serious invasions of privacy. By contrast, “non-routine” searches, such as strip-searches or body-cavity searches, require some individualized suspicion - that is, some cause to suspect a particular traveler of wrongdoing. Neither virtual strip-searches nor intrusive pat-downs should be considered “routine,” and therefore courts should rule that neither can be used for primary screening.
Will the Supreme Court recognize the unconstitutionality of body-scanning machines? It might have ruled against them five years ago, when the balance of power was controlled by Justice Sandra Day O’Connor.
O’Connor was an eloquent opponent of intrusive group searches that threatened privacy without increasing security. In a 1983 opinion upholding searches by drug-sniffing dogs, she recognized that a search is most likely to be considered constitutionally reasonable if it is very effective at discovering contraband without revealing innocent but embarrassing information. The backscatter machines seem, in O’Connor’s view, to be the antithesis of a reasonable search: They reveal a great deal of innocent but embarrassing information and are remarkably ineffective at revealing low-density contraband.
The Supreme Court might not view the matter differently today, now that O’Connor has been replaced by Alito, who wrote the lower-court opinion insisting that screening technologies had to be both effective and “minimally intrusive.” Last year, the court struck down strip-searches in schools (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/25/AR2009062501690.html) by a vote of 8 to 1.
In many cases, furthermore, Supreme Court justices are influenced by public opinion, consciously or unconsciously, and some polls suggest that opposition to these screening measures has grown in recent months. That reflects a basic truth of the politics of privacy: People are most likely to be outraged over a particular privacy invasion when their own privacy has actually been violated.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/24/AR2010112404510.html

[ChumpDumper]

Its relevant because many posters in this forum still wear blinders. We even had posters saying that we should shut up and trust the TSA on the new security measures :lol

Sheepish trust in Big Brother is still a daily occurence around these parts, Chump.Is Griffin barred from flying today?

Yes or no.

Surely someone so current on these issues as you would know.

[Parker2112]

Is Griffin barred from flying today?

Yes or no.

Surely someone so current on these issues as you would know.

He wasnt barred from flying then. Do you understand what it means to be on a watch list?

Yes or No. Wait....We already know. Know that its No. Why don't you know Chump?

[ChumpDumper]

Tell me what being on the watch list means.

Be specific.

[ChumpDumper]

And give me a link to the current list.

Thanks.

[Parker2112]

you sure make a lot of demands for somebody in the dark, lol...

[Parker2112]

Why dont you start informing yourself here, and then dont stop until you have the answers you need! Glad I could help in advance, Bub!

http://atwonline.com/international-aviation-regulation/news/tsa-takes-full-control-passenger-watch-list-checks-1201

[Parker2112]

encouragement chump!
yURRmWtbTbo

[ChumpDumper]

you sure make a lot of demands for somebody in the dark, lol...Just say you don't know, bub.

It will save you some embarrassment, bub.

[MannyIsGod]

Just say you don't know, bub.

It will save you some embarrassment, bub.

Too late.

[ChumpDumper]

I do apologize for implying he wasn't allowed to fly without knowing, but several sites rather breathlessly announced he was on the no-fly list.

[Parker2112]

I do apologize for implying he wasn't allowed to fly without knowing, but several sites rather breathlessly announced he was on the no-fly list.

I never read that. I was referring to the fact that finding yourself on a "watch" list doesnt = a "no-fly" list.

Dont guess the distinction matters much...either list seems to get er' dun:
http://www.aclu.org/national-security-technology-and-liberty/aclu-continues-receive-complaints-about-new-airport-screeni

[Parker2112]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Fly_List


The No Fly List is a list, created and maintained by the United States (http://spurstalk.com/wiki/United_States) government's Terrorist Screening Center (http://spurstalk.com/wiki/Terrorist_Screening_Center) (TSC)[1] (http://spurstalk.com/forums/#cite_note-0), of people who are not permitted to board a commercial aircraft (http://spurstalk.com/wiki/Aircraft) for travel in or out of the United States (http://spurstalk.com/wiki/United_States).

The No Fly List is different from the Terrorist Watch List, a much longer list of people suspected of some involvement with terrorism.[3] (http://spurstalk.com/forums/#cite_note-attachA-Part1-2) The Terrorist Watch List contained over one million names as of summer 2010, according to the TSC

[ChumpDumper]

I never read that.I'm telling you what I read.

What part of that do you not understand?


Dont guess the distinction matters much...either list seems to get er' dun:
http://www.aclu.org/national-security-technology-and-liberty/aclu-continues-receive-complaints-about-new-airport-screeniSo you don't have the current list I can read?

And you can't tell me what it means?

[Parker2112]

http://wewontfly.com/about

[Parker2112]

I'm telling you what I read.

What part of that do you not understand?

lol...do you understand I was explaining my error?



So you don't have the current list I can read?

And you can't tell me what it means?

do you understand there are two lists?
did you specify which list?
do you understand the difference between the two?

yes or no. yes or no. yes or no.

[ChumpDumper]

lol...do you understand I was explaining my error?Do you understand I was explaining my error?


do you understand there are two lists?Yes.


did you specify which list?Yes. The list in question is watch list. We had straightened that out.


do you understand the difference between the two?Yes.

Actually, I'll take either list since you made this a much more general thread..

Thanks in advance.

[Parker2112]

i looked briefly for the watch list...couldnt find it.

[Parker2112]

you got anything, bub?

[ChumpDumper]

i looked briefly for the watch list...couldnt find it.So how does any one person know he's on it?

[Winehole23]

you got anything, bub?You may not know it yet but you just got dumpt.

You hit two or three links, none of them stuck, now you're begging us for answers.

[Winehole23]

At least that is honest, begging the whole board. You need the advice.

[boutons_deux]

More blatant intimidation, only inside-the-box, order-following Good Germans need apply to State Dept:

State Department To Columbia University Students: DO NOT Discuss WikiLeaks On Facebook, Twitter

http://i.huffpost.com/gen/224887/thumbs/s-WIKILEAKS-COLUMBIA-large.jpg

Talking about WikiLeaks on Facebook or Twitter could endanger your job prospects, a State Department official warned students at Columbia University's School of International and Public Affairs this week.

An email from SIPA's Office of Career Services went out Tuesday afternoon with a caution from the official, an alumnus of the school. Students who will be applying for jobs in the federal government could jeopardize their prospects by posting links to WikiLeaks online, or even by discussing the leaked documents on social networking sites, the official was quoted as saying.

"[The alumnus] recommends that you DO NOT post links to these documents nor make comments on social media sites such as Facebook or through Twitter," the Office of Career Services advised students. "Engaging in these activities would call into question your ability to deal with confidential information, which is part of most positions with the federal government."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/04/state-department-to-colum_n_792059.html?view=print

.

[Parker2112]

So how does any one person know he's on it?

request under FOIA.

[Parker2112]

thats one way at least

[ChumpDumper]

request under FOIA.


thats one way at leastIs it?

Who has done that?