
The TSA has a watch list of people who present “challenges” to screening - wallace_f
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/17/us/politics/new-watch-list-tsa-screeners-.html
======
sbhn
It’s for your security. Nothing to hide, then nothing to fear. If it saves
just one life, who cares how much it costs, or what freedoms you have to
sacrifise. Just think what might happen. People sacrifised there lives for
your freedoms. You can’t put a price on safety. Think of the children. God
works in mesterious ways. It’s time to reflect, and open page x and chapter y
of the bible. Ask not, what your country can do for you, but what you can do
for your country. God save the queen

~~~
NegativeK
I've downvoted you because parroting the phrases of people we disagree with as
a form of mocking doesn't contribute to the conversation.

~~~
sbhn
Since when did repeating the doctrine become mockery.

There always seems to be a need for the bullies of society to have there say.
The TSA in this case. You disagree and they will beat you. You agree and they
will beat you for mockery.

~~~
jeremyt
When a doctrine mocks itself.

~~~
bradknowles
Would that a doctrine could.

But a doctrine is not sentient, nor sapient.

~~~
pritambaral
Doesn't have to be sentient of sapient to mock itself.

------
TaylorAlexander
When we see stories of China’s social credit system, I always see people who
automatically shudder at the thought. But in the end, the US wants the same
thing. The Chinese system almost seems more honest, because they admit what it
is and embrace it. In the US such a system would be piecemeal and hidden. It’s
not clear to me that that’s better.

~~~
josephjrobison
The beautiful thing is you know you’re in a truly free society because we can
react to this stuff publicly and have absolutely no fear of reprisal.

~~~
baudehlo
Yay you can be annoyed. Yet 17 years of being annoyed and neither political
party wants to change this situation. Why?

~~~
propogandist
the american people have been led to believe they Only have two choices,
either the left or the right

~~~
krageon
There is no "left" in american politics. Only right and extreme-right.

------
edwhitesell
Part of me (a small part) wants to be OK with this. Because, a
person/business/organization should be able to maintain information on
interactions with people where "issues" have occurred. Example: "Hey, if this
guy comes into the restaurant, he tends to drink too much and cause trouble."

Unfortunately, the TSA's track-record with pretty much everything is terrible.
So, I don't see anything good coming from it.

*edit: example in the first paragraph

~~~
greggarious
I opt out of the body scanner, and often experience extreme levels of
hostility due to this. (Or related issues, such as keeping my items in my view
during the screening process.)

I have never sworn, threatened, etc a TSO, but I still fear I could be put on
such a list one day for my "difficult" behavior.

Personally, I think if they think behavior is egregious enough to need to be
documented they should have the airport police cite the person for disorderly
conduct. Police officers have a fairly wide latitude for issuing this charge,
and we have an established court system to deal with appealing the matter.

Much more democratic than a secret list.

~~~
jeffwass
I just flew from UK to USA and the UK security (Heathrow) made my 5-year-old
daughter go through the body scanner!!

Ie, the first metal detector arch beeped for her (I think it was a hair clip
she had on) and they said she had no choice but to go through the body
scanner.

I was not comfortable with that at all, but they lied and told me I had no
choice. Immediately afterwards I looked it up online and saw that you can opt-
out with a pat down.

I was pretty pissed they didn’t let me know this option, told me I had no
choice. I think they were being lazy and didn’t want to deal with extra work.
I submitted a formal complaint to Heathrow within an hour and they didn’t
admit wrongdoing. They said there’s always an option to pay down. But refused
to acknowledge their own security people didn’t present me with that option.

Anyway, just my rant from what happened a few days ago, somewhat on topic to
this. (It’s the UK version of the TFA).

~~~
tsycho
I don't know if I would be comfortable with TSA agents patting down my 5 year
old daughter either; so even if you legally had a choice, it wasn't a great
one :(

------
tehwebguy
There is virtually zero chance that I’m not on this list.

Attorneys: if you think that there is a case to be made about civil rights
here, and you are looking for a star plaintive, I can imagine no greater joy
than ruining the TSA and I would be happy to help.

~~~
justwalt
>virtually no chance

What makes you say that?

~~~
tehwebguy
Long story short, one time TSA incorrectly thought I carried a weapon into
security. I didn’t, police were called and they confirmed it was a toy fidget
spinner.

A TSA employee who was never given my drivers license looked over one of the
cops’ shoulder and jotted my info down. I went on my way but 45 days later I
got a fine and a three-year pre-check ban.

I fought the case directly with TSA, inc submitting a letter from LAX PD
stating there were no weapons incidences whatsoever on the day in question.
They dropped the Notice of Violation immediately.

The pre-check ban, however, is unchallengeable. It should expire this winter
but my hopes are not high that I’ll ever get it again.

------
AdmiralAsshat
Can't wait to see if people who choose to opt-out of the x-ray screenings
start showing up on this list.

~~~
cortesoft
There is no x-ray screening of people.

~~~
williamscales
To be fair, they did used to use backscatter X-ray machines for a period
before moving completely to mm wave.

------
harry8
This is what happens whenever you have unchecked power. It grabs more power.
There is likely nothing deliberately malicious or malevolent here and those
grabbing this new power have probably convinced themselves its necessary for
safety and similar reasons. Any power without proper checks and balances will
be used to garner more power. Any power without proper checks and balances
will be abused by the person wielding that power - maybe without them even
knowing they are doing so.

------
koolba
How do they know if you're on the list? I don't see anywhere in the article
where it explains how the boots on the ground would know that John Q. Public
is a persona non grata.

Does it get flagged when you scan your ticket and then coded into the
otherwise meaningless scribble they write on it?

~~~
txcwpalpha
AFAIK it's handled through the airline when you purchase the ticket, and then
is marked on your boarding pass that you get from the airline. If you've ever
seen a boarding pass that has "SSSS" printed on it, it's to indicate to
airline staff and TSA that the pass holder gets additional screening. I
imagine this "95 list" is similar.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secondary_Security_Screening_S...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secondary_Security_Screening_Selection)

~~~
kleiba
I'm pretty sure I don't have to show my boarding pass to the airport security
when going through the screening here in Germany..?!

~~~
hectormalot
I’ve had SSSS on my boarding pass multiple times when flying to the US. At
Stockholm and Copenhagen they will take you out of line at the extra check at
the gate (post security), to do another GC check of your luggage. Swedish
airport security typically would also take my passport away until after the
check. Amsterdam has a central area for this with Delta, after which they tell
you the real gate (which is not on the monitors). United is again at the gate.
Also: on days that I would get SSSS’d, mobile and self-service check-in would
not work, forcing me to get the pass at the counter.

Flights not to the US, even if outside the EU don’t have these checks.

Honestly, If I would have something to hide, the SSSS on my pass would give me
ample warning to just leave the airport again.

Wondering if I can ask ‘why’ using a GDPR request now

------
h2olover
"The TSA is not an intelligence agency..."

~~~
varenc
They’re not even a law enforcement agency despite the very cop-like uniforms.
They’re not legally “peace officers”, can’t make arrests, execute warrants,
handle firearms, etc. I’ve seen discussions where actual police officers are a
bit upset the TSA is watering down their uniform style, down to including
police-like badges.

Here’s the evolution of TSA uniforms over time. You the transition to being
faux-cops: [https://i0.wp.com/loweringthebar.net/wp-
content/uploads/2012...](https://i0.wp.com/loweringthebar.net/wp-
content/uploads/2012/01/6a00d83451bd4469e20162ffafd636970d.png)

There was even proposed legislation to stop calling them “officers” but this
didn’t happen. More details here: [https://loweringthebar.net/2012/01/junior-
tsa-officer-badge-...](https://loweringthebar.net/2012/01/junior-tsa-officer-
badge-is-creepy-fraudulent.html)

~~~
rayiner
> There's a bill currently pending that would roll this back, introduced by
> Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) in December. H.R. 3608, the "Stop TSA's Reach
> in Policy Act" (yes, the "STRIP Act") would prohibit any TSA employee who
> has not received the federal law enforcement training from being called an
> "officer" or wearing a badge or uniform that resembles what a real officer
> would wear.

------
DannyB2
> “The bottom line is that in the post 9/11 world, do we really need another
> watch list — particularly one from the T.S.A., which is not an intelligence
> agency?”

You can never have too many watch lists. For your safety.

We now need a watch list of people who do not like watch lists.

For people who do not like being put on watch lists.

For people outside TSA who create watch lists of watch lists.

A watch list for journalists who write about watch lists.

Basically, there is no problem so great it cannot be solved by creating
another watch list.

~~~
sametmax
Also you should make a watchlist of people not in a watchlist. Being THAT
innocent is very suspicious.

~~~
mywittyname
Some companies could get together and create a WATCO score. Something like a
credit score, but is based on information from various watchlists.

Then you could sell consumers products the help them lower their WATCO score.

------
greggarious
I'm curious how the TSA accesses this list?

For example, does the person scanning my boarding pass see it? IIRC the ID
checkers often don't have radios or full blown computers.

Likewise, the screeners themselves don't look at your BP or a computer.

Do they just... warn the entire staff a known soveriegn citizen will be coming
through?

(I'm not endorsing such a list, but others have commented how it's
problematic... reservations aside I'm curious about the logistics of how they
would even make use of such a list)

------
mindcrime
The TSA should be disbanded, full-stop. It does nothing to enhance anyone's
security, wastes taxpayers money, and acts as justification to accept
infringement of basic human rights. The agency is a net-negative for our
society and simply should not exist.

~~~
lightbyte
The TSA is a massive welfare jobs program for under/non-educated people, they
employ approx. 60k people. The security theatre is just the guise they gave it
for the welfare to be accepted by the public.

~~~
ghostly_s
Great! Let's give those people free jobs doing something useful, instead.

~~~
poulsbohemian
Think how nice it would be having them all work on trail maintenance in our
national parks. Our parks are a national treasure, yet apart from the majors
(Yosemite, Yellowstone, etc) most have approximately zero budget for trail
maintenance. In the Wallowa-Whitman, for example, last year they had
approximately _two_ people covering that entire area. There are so many other
places we could deploy federal workers into jobs programs apart from the
defense industry and this security theater.

~~~
freehunter
But that's actual work. If people wanted to do actual work, there are plenty
of manual labor jobs unfilled right now. You'd have to walk and dig and use
tools and maybe sweat, none of which the TSA guys have to do.

~~~
twothamendment
I'd like to see the TSA go as much as the next, but they have some job
positions I'd call real work. Throwing 80 pound bags on and off conveyor
belts, looking forward to ski season when the ski bags hit, opening up
suitcases full of things I don't want to see, touch or smell. They have their
share of jobs sitting around or standing around looking important, but behind
the scenes there is some "real" work going on. Too bad it doesn't accomplish
much.

------
blackrock
This is "Orwellian nonsense".

------
ajeet_dhaliwal
Don’t be overheard mentioning ‘hacker news’, sounds dangerous enough to be on
the list perhaps.

~~~
indemnity
Possibly coincidence, but the two times I bitched about transiting through the
US on an upcoming flight on Twitter (which has my real name), I got randomly
selected for SSS.

------
emodendroket
At a certain point so many people are going to be on one "list" or another
that the purpose is completely defeated (well, one wonders if that's not
already the case).

------
frenchman_in_ny
So what happens if you're a member of TSA Pre / Global Entry and you land
yourself on this list?

------
cv1123
I miss the East German border. It was relaxed by comparison.

~~~
hodgesrm
Umm not really. By one count over 900 people were killed trying to cross the
border to West Germany. [0]

[0]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Escape_attempts_and_victims_of...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Escape_attempts_and_victims_of_the_inner_German_border)

~~~
kzrdude
The checkpoints on the other hand (and not escapes across the border) were
rather intimidating and slow, but didn't kill visitors who went through
orderly.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crossing_the_inner_German_bord...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crossing_the_inner_German_border)

------
dang
We changed the url from
[https://boingboing.net/2018/05/30/the-95-list.html](https://boingboing.net/2018/05/30/the-95-list.html),
which points to this article as well as to [http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-
ed/la-oe-bovard-tsa-watchl...](http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-
bovard-tsa-watchlist-20180528-story.html), which itself is based on the NYT
report.

~~~
zsellera
by doing so the content is now blocked from eu-based users because some gdpr
shittery at la times

~~~
mfjordvald
I accessed it just fine from Portugal just now. Maybe it's something else
wrong?

~~~
Fnoord
The Latimes article is blocked for EU; the NYT article works though without
opt-out, and clicking "X" is same as "I Agree" (hello dark pattern).

------
Karishma1234
Just wondering why do these polarising news articles from Main stream media
being allowed on front page ? I do not see how HN community can have a healthy
discussion around this topic that did not happen in past.

------
chris_va
This reads more like an annoyed rant based on hearsay than actual journalism.

I am not a lawyer, so it may be that there are legal reasons why the TSA
(specifically) cannot maintain a list of people, but ...

The majority of large organization dealing with customers keep customer
service records, including notes on negative interactions. Keeping a list of
people that have assaulted your employees, if the intent is to avoid creating
a similar situation in the future, is completely rational and better for all
parties.

If there was evidence of the TSA denying transit rights based on that list,
_that_ would be newsworthy, but it sounds like there is no evidence of that.

~~~
pc86
The government has a very long list of things they are specifically prohibited
from doing, that under some circumstances a corporation _might_ be able to do.
Here's ten off the top of my head.[0]

That being said, the _government_ keeping a secret list of a certain subset of
its citizens certainly leaves a bad taste in my mouth even if I can't
perfectly express why. I'd just as soon not have department of the federal
government tracking who is good and who is bad outside of law enforcement.

[0]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Bill_of_Rights](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Bill_of_Rights)

~~~
pathseeker
That's not a list of what the Government is prohibited from doing. It's a list
of personal freedoms and rights. That's an important distinction.

~~~
BugsJustFindMe
I don't like doing this, but, you're wrong. The US "Bill of Rights" is most
definitely a list of what the government is prohibited from doing. That's why
every entry on it says things in the negative, like "shall make no law" and
"shall not be", and why entries have specific context clarifications like
"Congress" and "In all criminal prosecutions" and so on.

No part of the US Constitution outlines individual rights or freedoms. It
outlines powers of the states, powers of the federation, and limitations on
those powers. Sometimes certain "unalienable rights" are referenced, but there
is no list of rights in the Bill of Rights.

It's also not an "important distinction" here.

~~~
pc86
Please don't shy away from doing it. There are usually several objectively
wrong comments in every popular thread, sometimes approaching a double digit
percentage when discussing anything remotely political (even apolitical
governmental things like what the Bill of Rights is).

I wish more HN commenters would just come out and say "No, this is wrong and
here's why."

