DHS Passenger Scoring Almost Certainly Illegal 181
Vicissidude writes "At the National Targeting Center, the Automated Targeting System program harvests up to 50 fields of passenger data from international flights, including names, e-mail addresses and phone numbers, and uses watchlists, criminal databases and other government systems to assign risk scores to every passenger. When passengers deplane, Customs and Border Protection personnel then target the high scorers for extra screening. Data and the scores can be kept for 40 years, shared widely, and be used in hiring decisions. Travelers may neither see nor contest their scores. The ATS program appears to fly in the face of legal requirements Congress has placed in the Homeland Security appropriations bills for the last three years." From the article: "Marc Rotenberg, the director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, said he was unaware of the language but that it clearly applies to the Automated Targeting System, not just Secure Flight, the delayed successor to CAPPS II. 'Bingo, that's it -- the program is unlawful,' Rotenberg said. 'I think 514(e) stands apart logically (from the other provisions) and 514 says the restrictions apply to any 'other follow-on or successor passenger prescreening program'. It would be very hard to argue that ATS as applied to travelers is not of the kind contemplated (by the lawmakers).'"
I've seen this before (Score:2, Interesting)
Don't fly. (Score:3, Interesting)
Traveling by bus, train, or car is not as fast or comfortable, but at least you can do it with some of your privacy intact.
Just say no.
Re:Dupe...? (Score:4, Interesting)
It's things like this that I like about slashdot. Posting multiple articles from different sources about the same subject allows for both a healthy debate by us and tends to provide more then one side to a story. Instead of just getting the bias of one publication we get to see the subtle shades of bias and decide for ourselves who makes sense, who we want to agree with or believe.
Domestic versus International Flights (Score:2, Interesting)
Once again ignorance is no bar to blanket assertions of illegal acts.
Re:Won't be too long (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Denies rights based on secret laws (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Don't fly. (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Will congress simply legalize it? (Score:3, Interesting)
Umm.... because it never has before? Just like voting Republican never has before. Einstein's definition of insanity applies here. If you keep doing exactly the same thing, and keep expecting different results, that's insane. For people who really want change to occur, the only hope is to do something different. Vote for the candidate that actually comes closest to representing your views, not for the one you think most electable that you can barely stomach over the other guy. I don't care if you vote Libertarian, Green, or whatever, but until enough people are sick enough of the existing regime to actually vote for something different, you wont see any changes.
People will respond with but.. but.. but.. throw away your vote... blah, blah, blah. The thing is, it is a chicken and egg problem. If you never take a stand for what you want to have happen, it will never happen. Yes, you may take your stand and lose, over and over again, but at the end of the day you know what? I can feel good about the choices I made. Most of my candidates over the years have lost, some have won, and every one of those has a voting record, so far, that I can agree with. In the last presidential election, I knew that I couldn't stand Bush. I knew that Kerry would do things that I would abhor. I knew that one of them was going to be in charge for the following four years. But I also knew that I would have a comfortable conscience, having voted for the person I thought would do the best job. And, If the person I voted for actually by some miracle won, I knew that I could look forward to things actually improving. If they didn't then I could at least say, in good conscience, that I had still done my best. How many people who voted Bush in actually agreed with most of the things he was promising to do and are happy and proud about it today? How many people who voted for Kerry, actually agreed with what he was promising to do, and would have been happy and proud with the results if he had won. Don't give me, "Well it would have been better than this." No! It still would have sucked to have Kerry extend the DCMA (a Clinton Era law). And if you think that Kerry would have been less of a **AA shill than Clinton was, you are sadly mistaken.
Get out and vote people, but vote for who you believe in. Not which new bum can throw the old bum out.