
US Terrorist Database Growing at Rapid Rate - rpm4321
http://news.yahoo.com/us-terrorist-database-growing-rapid-rate-223303875.html
======
higherpurpose
1.5 million "terrorists" \- seriously?! This is the problem with the
"haystack" mentality, instead of proper investigation-based targeting - you
get a haystack of _worthless leads_ and _false positives_.

It does, however, have the huge benefit for those in power of knowing
everything about anyone, and about all of their "enemies" (not necessarily
"national security enemies").

Also, with the current policy for identifying "terrorists", don't expect to
"war on terror" to _ever_ end.

------
mrinterweb
Replace the word terrorist with communist and you have McCarthyism all over
again. When citizens have to fear of being labeled as a terrorist, I can't
help but see history repeating its self.

------
mhurron
> August 2013, there were 700,000 names on the watch list

How many of those names are incredibly common names? My dad almost missed a
connecting flight in LA because he was on the 'No Fly' list. He wasn't, but
his incredibly common name (like Richard Smith type common) was.

~~~
u124556
Don't you have some sort of unique id to identify one person from another even
if they share the same name in the US?

~~~
jrockway
Yes, the TSA gives you a "redress number" if you're mistaken for someone on
the No Fly List. You plug that into your airline's website, and then you
aren't bothered anymore.

I have one! But only because I have TSA Pre✓. (Quite possibly the best
government program ever.)

~~~
greggman
That was sarcasm right? Pay the oppressive government program to be less
oppressive? And of course if you're poor too bad for you.

~~~
jrockway
I wasn't being sarcastic. The program is a good idea: I pay to have my
background checked, and then I'm not treated like a criminal. It has some
foundation based in logic (I'm pretty low-risk, compared to anyone that shows
up with a plane ticket), so I'm not going to complain. And if you're super-
libertarian or whatever, you should be happy that I'm paying the cost, not the
taxpayer!

The good news is, it appears the background check doesn't really matter. At
JFK, they siphon people at random into these lines when the main line is full.
This hints that the reduced scrutiny will be coming for everyone soon.

~~~
hackuser
> I pay to have my background checked, and then I'm not treated like a
> criminal.

Wow. I don't think objecting to that makes someone ...

> super-libertarian or whatever

I notice that people who think don't object to these programs resort to two
arguments:

1) What me worry? 2) Name calling

It makes me think that they don't have much of an argument, and adds to my
growing conviction that there is no argument.

EDIT: slight reword

~~~
jrockway
Isn't dismissing my argument as "name calling" name calling?

------
sneak
If they are terrorists (criminals) and the government is not prosecuting them,
the government is breaking the law.

If they are innocent of wrongdoing (not terrorists) and the government is
depriving them of rights afforded to others, the government is breaking the
law.

------
cordite
My high school Spanish teacher has to bring a form from homeland security
every time to the airport, because she married someone from Argentina with a
common last name.

Names are the poorest identifier here.

------
u124556
How many terrorist attacks have these things actually prevented? Won't it
become worthless if it keeps growing?

~~~
imaginenore
With a great confidence we can estimate it at zero.

Security theater is just that.

------
igl
I guess it grows with the number of Tor users.

