Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

One Person Successfully Removed From US No-Fly List

Soulskill posted about 7 months ago | from the one-down,-countless-thousands-to-go dept.

Transportation 286

An anonymous reader writes "In February, Judge William Alsup ruled in favor of Rahinah Ibrahim, who sued the U.S. government in 2006 after she was mistakenly added to the no-fly list and subsequently denied entry to the country. Now, the Department of Justice has finally decided it won't appeal the ruling, making Ibrahim the first person to challenge the list at trial and get herself removed. 'But Ibrahim's case, as just one of hundreds of thousands of individuals who have been placed on such lists, shows the system's opacity. First, the only surefire way to even determine if one is on such a list in the U.S. is to attempt to board a flight and be denied. Even after that happens, when a denied person inquires about his or her status, the likely response will be that the government "can neither confirm nor deny" the placement on such lists. The government's surrender in Ibrahim comes on the heels of a new report by the American Civil Liberties Union that shows just how insanely difficult it is to contest one's status on the government blacklists (PDF).'"

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Fun fact (4, Informative)

pegr (46683) | about 7 months ago | (#46603713)

Judge William Alsup also ruled on the Oracle/Google case. The more you know! ;)

Re:Fun fact (4, Insightful)

Daniel Hoffmann (2902427) | about 7 months ago | (#46603857)

The guy is the patron saint of common sense. One would think that common sense would not need a patron saint, being, you know, common...

Re:Fun fact (5, Insightful)

kylemonger (686302) | about 7 months ago | (#46603981)

Too bad getting to common sense took eight years.

Re:Fun fact (1)

davester666 (731373) | about 7 months ago | (#46604293)

For the next person, the gov't is determined to make sure it won't take less than 10 years.

Re:Fun fact (1)

FuzzNugget (2840687) | about 7 months ago | (#46604989)

It's certainly sense, but even more certainly *not* common, unfortunately.

The lies that we tell ourselves (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46603743)

The shinning city on the hill, the land of the free.

Re:The lies that we tell ourselves (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46603937)

We have to do this, and more, so much more, to keep us safe from the terrists who hate us for our freedom.

Re:The lies that we tell ourselves (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46604131)

And also because our tanks are in their backyard.

Their literal backyard.

Hack it to add American names like "John Smith" (4, Insightful)

romanval (556418) | about 7 months ago | (#46603817)

I'm not too sure how a no-fly list works since many people can have the same name.
If that's the case, what's stopping someone from legally changing their name to something more american/western-european and re-issuing their passport?

Re:Hack it to add American names like "John Smith" (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46603867)

No-fly lists simply shouldn't exist, regardless of whether or not they can work. The idea that you can be considered too dangerous (Without a trial!) to fly and yet not dangerous enough to arrest is absurd. As others have said, this is just used for oppression.

Re:Hack it to add American names like "John Smith" (1)

NoNonAlphaCharsHere (2201864) | about 7 months ago | (#46604105)

It's so much worse than that. It means that you are required by law to notify the government at least three days in advance before you plan to travel (by air) from state to state.

Re:Hack it to add American names like "John Smith" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46604195)

But if they won't confirm, nor deny, that you are on such a list, how are you to know if informing the gov't is required?

Re:Hack it to add American names like "John Smith" (2)

NoNonAlphaCharsHere (2201864) | about 7 months ago | (#46604391)

You're missing the point. EVERYONE is required to notify the government in advance before they fly.

Re:Hack it to add American names like "John Smith" (4, Insightful)

spire3661 (1038968) | about 7 months ago | (#46604363)

"No papers? State to state?"

"No papers."

"Then i will live in Montana...."

Re:Hack it to add American names like "John Smith" (1, Redundant)

CohibaVancouver (864662) | about 7 months ago | (#46604497)

Actually, I think you will need *two* wives.

Re:Hack it to add American names like "John Smith" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46604963)

It also means other countries, like Canada, have to inform the US government of everyone that is going to be on the plane should the plane enter US airspace. Even if it is not landing at a US airport. Sometimes flying across Canada or in and out of Canada a plane may enter US airspace for a short period of time but has no intention of staying in US airspace or landing at a US airport.

Re:Hack it to add American names like "John Smith" (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46604335)

No fly lists where you can not get off but only can add names is even worse. At some point the list just gets long and worthless. If everybody is on the list then no terrorist can do harm with a airplane...

By the way: I have a friend who's son is on the no-fly list since he's 3 years old! He's twin brother is not. Doesn't make a lot of sense to me. No way to get him off. There is just nobody responsible you could apply to.

Re:Hack it to add American names like "John Smith" (5, Funny)

un1nsp1red (2503532) | about 7 months ago | (#46604649)

I have a friend who's son is on the no-fly list since he's 3 years old! He's twin brother is not. Doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

Makes sense to me. There's *always* an evil twin. Always....

Re:Hack it to add American names like "John Smith" (4, Funny)

radarskiy (2874255) | about 7 months ago | (#46604993)

The evil twin is the one NOT on the list, because he submitted false evidence about his brother.

Re:Hack it to add American names like "John Smith" (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46604723)

who's son --> whose son
He's twin --> His twin

How can you be so ignorant?

Re:Hack it to add American names like "John Smith" (1, Interesting)

gnasher719 (869701) | about 7 months ago | (#46604347)

No-fly lists simply shouldn't exist, regardless of whether or not they can work. The idea that you can be considered too dangerous (Without a trial!) to fly and yet not dangerous enough to arrest is absurd. As others have said, this is just used for oppression.

Now what you say doesn't make sense. You can't get arrested for being dangerous. You can only get arrested for committing or possibly planning to commit a crime (and "planning" means actively doing things to help committing the crime, not "intending". )

That's of course independent of the fact that it is ridiculous to say there's a million people too dangerous to fly; and even if it was true there would be no excuse for making it hard for people not belonging on that list to come off it.

Re:Hack it to add American names like "John Smith" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46604459)

Now what you say doesn't make sense. You can't get arrested for being dangerous.

Don't be pedantic. You can be dangerous and be committing crimes at the same time.

Re:Hack it to add American names like "John Smith" (1)

suutar (1860506) | about 7 months ago | (#46604591)

You can't get arrested for being dangerous.

but apparently you can be punished for it, without charges or trial.

Re:Hack it to add American names like "John Smith" (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46604371)

It is interesting to look at this in the perspective. The one that shows the reasons and arguments used by founding fathers of the republic to make something different than opaque, corrupt and inefficient regimes of old continent to create something different: where transparency, the rule of the law etc are basic principles. Now look at what happened: this funny secrete courts of which decisions you may not talk, the no-fly lists which you cannot question because you will never know you are on one. Add to this: enhanced interrogation techniques, extrajudicial killings, the whole nonsense of war on drugs, the violence and inefficiency of US judicial and penal systems as well as lies used to send troops all over the planet (Collin Power etc). I wonder if that was unavoidable (I think it was). Every being and republic too gets old and starts seeing ghosts generated by the old brain, accumulated fat causes the body to stop functioning properly, Just wondering. Right now even Germany is more transparent and has more efficient state than US does. I guess the only branches of US gov. that still work kind of well are military and 'security' industry. I wonder how does that feel to become what one tried to escape from?

Re:Hack it to add American names like "John Smith" (2)

Anubis IV (1279820) | about 7 months ago | (#46604393)

The idea that you can be considered too dangerous (Without a trial!) to fly and yet not dangerous enough to arrest is absurd.

I generally agree, but it's relatively trivial to imagine cases where they can't arrest someone, despite having every intention of doing so should the opportunity present itself. If local authorities are uncooperative, should the American government allow a criminal who they believe may be a danger to the flight board the plane and hope that the person just sits there nicely until they can be arrested when they land?

I don't have an easy answer for that, and I don't know whether that sort of a situation would even be sufficient to justify a (much smaller) no-fly list. But at the very least, it's something to consider. And it's also a slippery slope of which we need to be extremely wary, because if you start to loosen the definition of "criminal" a bit (e.g. people we think are bad, people our allies want to arrest, people who associate with bad people), it can easily end up where we are now, which is in no way acceptable.

Re:Hack it to add American names like "John Smith" (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46604487)

I generally agree, but it's relatively trivial to imagine cases where they can't arrest someone, despite having every intention of doing so should the opportunity present itself.

Then too bad. If they don't have enough evidence to arrest someone for committing crimes, they don't get to punish someone without trial. Freedom has risks, and ones I'm more than willing to take.

Re:Hack it to add American names like "John Smith" (1)

suutar (1860506) | about 7 months ago | (#46604621)

yes, but you believe in accepting risk. Many unfortunately believe that the duty of government is to eliminate risk (to them and theirs, at least).

Re:Hack it to add American names like "John Smith" (2)

Snotnose (212196) | about 7 months ago | (#46604913)

No, hack it to include names like John Boehner and Nancy Pelosi.

Re:Hack it to add American names like "John Smith" (1)

metalmaster (1005171) | about 7 months ago | (#46604239)

If there's any hope for the human race, this "list" is a bit more extensive than just a name

Re:Hack it to add American names like "John Smith" (1)

bluefoxlucid (723572) | about 7 months ago | (#46604529)

/nick David Smith

/nick Bill Gates

/nick Elon Musk

You can legally change your name to the name of someone who not only flies a lot, but will be pissed off a lot if they can't fly.

I like that - money (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46604825)

More than likely, someone named "John Smith" will have buckets of money to fight this on all levels - courts, lobbying the assholes in Congress, the President (Whoever it is at the time..) and the media.

Fuck yeah!

Money rules - Constitution (IV Amendment be damned) drools!

Re:Hack it to add American names like "John Smith" (1)

ArcadeMan (2766669) | about 7 months ago | (#46605015)

I'd use the name "Stan Smith" instead.

Re:Hack it to add American names like "John Smith" (1)

radarskiy (2874255) | about 7 months ago | (#46605017)

At one point there were 18 David Nelsons in Oregon alone who got hassled at PDX due to the no fly list.

hundreds of thousands of individuals (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46603825)

reads like zionic nazi phosphorian cleansing

Re:hundreds of thousands of individuals (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46604663)

maybe not with the zionic part,
but the rest, agreed, like Dakkau, and other various atrocities through out history.

I think its amazing, how most species try to support one and other to some degree for survival..
Humans, allthey do is look for any and all ways to ex0ploit one another, take advantage, promogulate unrest and deceit.
Why does it seem so stupid that we live in a culture, conditioned to screw over one another.
I beleive in support of your fellow man/woman. I think and feel it has greater returns, and there is more to be accomplished, as a result..
If every one does at a minium 25% of their part, then think of the world peace to had from such an event..
   

Shocked and saddened (1, Funny)

SpaghettiPattern (609814) | about 7 months ago | (#46603831)

Now even foreigners may have the law supporting them. The American Dream has definitively gone to the dogs.

Re:Shocked and saddened (0)

jandersen (462034) | about 7 months ago | (#46603903)

Ironically, most Americans (apart from the relatively few Native Americans) were foreigners not long ago.

Re:Shocked and saddened (1)

NatasRevol (731260) | about 7 months ago | (#46604141)

I think you mean their ancestors.

Re:Shocked and saddened (2, Insightful)

spire3661 (1038968) | about 7 months ago | (#46604389)

I am a native american. My family came from Sicily, but I was born here, thus i am a native American. This land is as much mine as any Native American's

Re:Shocked and saddened (4, Insightful)

Rosco P. Coltrane (209368) | about 7 months ago | (#46603907)

Tell that to the poor sods in Gitmo still awaiting trial - or charges, for that matter.

Didn't our current Glorious Leader promise to close down that shame of a concentration camp years ago, incidentally?

Re:Shocked and saddened (4, Informative)

Holi (250190) | about 7 months ago | (#46604013)

He did, and he tried, but some ass hats in Congress made it impossible. Please if you gon to cast blame, cast it in the right direction.

Re:Shocked and saddened (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46604197)

Not impossible, he just had to do it without spending any federal money for prisoner transfers. Surely there's a way to do that without money ever needing to change hands for anything.

Re:Shocked and saddened (1)

UnderCoverPenguin (1001627) | about 7 months ago | (#46604325)

There is also the problem of "not in my backyard". Many people living or working near facilities (both in the the US and in other countries) where any of these prisoners might be moved to have been very opposed to "their" facility receiving any of the Gitmo prisoners.

Re:Shocked and saddened (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46604343)

Not impossible, he just had to do it without spending any federal money for prisoner transfers. Surely there's a way to do that without money ever needing to change hands for anything.

Sure, just not put it on the books - like the entire Iraq war. Perhaps Obama has more integrity than you-know-who.

Re:Shocked and saddened (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46604979)

Yes, enough integrity to not follow through on his word. Must take some kind of strong character for that!

Re:Shocked and saddened (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46604613)

Release them on the beach in Cuba. "Survival is your problem now. Don't expect peanut paste and prayer mats from the Cuban government."

Re:Shocked and saddened (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46604213)

He did, and he tried, but some ass hats in Congress made it impossible. Please if you gon to cast blame, cast it in the right direction.

Wasn't Obama's party controlling both houses of Congress for the first two years he was in office? Why didn't he get it closed then?

Re:Shocked and saddened (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46604637)

Because republican'ts! That's why! I'm a whiney Democrat baby!

Re:Shocked and saddened (0)

NoNonAlphaCharsHere (2201864) | about 7 months ago | (#46604251)

You mispelled *Republican* asshats, which is the part someone calling him "Glorious Leader" needs to be reminded of.

Re:Shocked and saddened (2)

iggymanz (596061) | about 7 months ago | (#46604375)

well, I'm not a fan of him but in this case he at least makes "pushes" to close it. most recent here:

http://www.politico.com/story/... [politico.com]

we can talk about dozen other campaign lies, but not this issue

Re:Shocked and saddened (1)

CohibaVancouver (864662) | about 7 months ago | (#46604599)

Didn't our current Glorious Leader promise to close down that shame of a concentration camp years ago, incidentally?

The main problem with "Gitmo" is there isn't anywhere to send many of the prisoners. You put them on a plane and send them to Yemen and Yemen says "They're not citizens. I refuse them admission. Take them back where they came from." Unless you just drop them off in the Afghan desert, what do you do with them?

Re:Shocked and saddened (1)

meta-monkey (321000) | about 7 months ago | (#46604783)

40 acres and a mule?

Re:Shocked and saddened (1)

phantomfive (622387) | about 7 months ago | (#46604829)

Not to mention some of them actually are terrorists

Re:Shocked and saddened (4, Insightful)

currently_awake (1248758) | about 7 months ago | (#46604961)

put them on trial. If you have proof of criminal activity then that should be easy. If you don't have proof then send them home. Better a hundred criminals go free than a single innocent man languish in jail.

Re:Shocked and saddened (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46605005)

Drop them off in the Afghan desert.

Re:Shocked and saddened (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46604023)

The "American Dream" never existed outside of myth.

Re:Shocked and saddened (1)

Nephandus (2953269) | about 7 months ago | (#46604531)

Now, explain to them the federal government had not popular support (thus wasn't "of the people") till well after the pretentious founding of the country. They won't care. Even those admitting the history of corruption are indoctrinated fanbois/grrls.

2006-2014 (4, Informative)

Rosco P. Coltrane (209368) | about 7 months ago | (#46603853)

So, 8 years for one person to be taken off the no-fly list. At this rate, ,by around 1,000,000 AD give or take, all innocent citizens denied their basic constitutional right to travel freely without trial will finally be allowed to board an airplane. Good news!

How is the no fly list legal? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46603859)

Can someone explain how the government can impose penalties on a person without providing the evidence against them? Is the entire premise that you can't show standing because you can't know you're on the list? It seems we have a shitload of that going on right now, whereas we shouldn't have any.

Re:How is the no fly list legal? (5, Insightful)

pegr (46683) | about 7 months ago | (#46604091)

Can someone explain how the government can impose penalties on a person without providing the evidence against them?

No.

Yes. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46604945)

Can someone explain how the government can impose penalties on a person without providing the evidence against them?

No.

We have an electorate that can be distracted easily and all a politician has to do is something stupid and when someone - like an apposing candidate - disputes that vote, the opposition is now "soft on terror" or "crime" or whatever and it works.

I live in a Republican county - solid - this is JUST an observation. ALL of our political calls by the telemarketers employed by Congressmen sound like this:

blah blah Conservative blah blah blah Conservative blah blah Conservative blah blah blah Conservative
right to life...
blah blah Conservative blah blah blah Conservative
low taxes ...blah blah Conservative blah blah blah Conservative
blah blah Conservative blah blah blah Conservative
blah blah Conservative blah blah blah Conservative
blah blah Conservative blah blah blah Conservative

NEVER EVER a solution.

My Congress people are assholes. I'm in Georgia, USA and all of my Congress critters are subhuman assholes. We gave you Newt, baby! Sorry. We are mouth breathing, knuckle dragging morons.

And we control our government. Because Jesus!

Frank Herbert in one of his novels said something like - politics and religion is formidable.

Yes, sir! That IS the case here in America! We ARE a theocracy in spirit! We are WORSE that IRAN!

Re:How is the no fly list legal? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46604415)

it is not a penalty but scrapping a privilege :)

Re:How is the no fly list legal? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46604665)

49 U.S.C. 40103 disagrees with your use of the word "privilege". :P

Re:How is the no fly list legal? (1)

phantomfive (622387) | about 7 months ago | (#46604815)

I believe their argument is that flying is a privilege, much like driving a car or getting a visa.
Don't expect me to defend that argument.

Re:How is the no fly list legal? (1)

Ogive17 (691899) | about 7 months ago | (#46604939)

I do not condone these types of lists

That being said, the US government can deny anyone entry for whatever reason they want. No foreigner has a right to enter the US.

Face Palm (5, Interesting)

Patent Lover (779809) | about 7 months ago | (#46603863)

The whole concept of a no-fly list so utterly asinine that it boggles the mind. Too dangerous to fly in a plane after going through security, not dangerous enough to arrest. Riiiiiiight.

Re:Face Palm (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46604053)

It's like the Russian boycotts of various agricultural products and processed food items of the neighboring countries if they don't do or do something for something which always shall be kept a secret for anybody outside of Moscow. Oh well, perhaps it's just the oligarchs and mafia bribing the ministries and other officials to cause fluctuations in the stock and futures markets to the detriment of the glorious peoples everywhere.

Re:Face Palm (1)

Virtucon (127420) | about 7 months ago | (#46604417)

Sounds more like California. [ca.gov]

Oh and California you still owe me a bag of oranges. I was planning to use those to sell in LA and pay for the family trip to Disneyland. F-Wads!

Re:Face Palm (4, Interesting)

Minwee (522556) | about 7 months ago | (#46604057)

It gets better. Would you believe that people who actually are suspected terrorists are kept off of the list to avoid tipping them off?

Not alerting the terrorists (3, Informative)

Firethorn (177587) | about 7 months ago | (#46604311)

My first thought was 'Given Fast&Furious*, yes'.

*Operation Fast&Furious [wikipedia.org] , where the ATF actually ordered a number of gun stores to sell to obvious Mexican cartel related straw purchasers in order to bust cartel leaders and such, then lost track of the guns.

Re:Not alerting the terrorists (1)

bluefoxlucid (723572) | about 7 months ago | (#46604585)

It's not like the Mexicans wouldn't have gotten their hands on guns some other way.

Re:Not alerting the terrorists (1)

qbast (1265706) | about 7 months ago | (#46604791)

Great justification. You don't mind if I kill you, right? You are going to die sooner or later anyway.

Re:Not alerting the terrorists (0)

asylumx (881307) | about 7 months ago | (#46604847)

Reductio Ad Absurdum fallacy at its finest.

Re:Not alerting the terrorists (1)

bluefoxlucid (723572) | about 7 months ago | (#46605053)

So, the same people would have killed the same other people with guns. But because it's these guns that got here by this program, this program is responsible? No you're dumb.

Re:Not alerting the terrorists (1)

lgw (121541) | about 7 months ago | (#46604831)

Illegal arms brokers are quick with that line. It may even be true. But that doesn't make it any less immoral to be the one doing it. We should not be the ones doing it.

Re:Not alerting the terrorists (1)

bluefoxlucid (723572) | about 7 months ago | (#46605109)

But it puts us in a better position to gain intelligence. Sometimes that doesn't pan out, but it provides an opportunity and doesn't make the situation worse. In this case, we've learned the limits of acquiring intelligence in this exact way; maybe this is a limitation of trying to track guns, or a limitation of the methods we used, but regardless we've still learned something.

That information wasn't really obtained at any expense beyond the basic economic program expense, and it has some value. You just don't like people being an observer behind the green camera instead of the blue one; it's okay to be behind the blue camera, but only assholes look through the green one.

Re:Face Palm (3, Interesting)

naasking (94116) | about 7 months ago | (#46604333)

I was just thinking this. The no-fly-list is counterproductive to intelligence work in which an important tool is surreptitiously tracking a person's movements to build a map of their contact network. All the no-fly-list does would do is make it harder to track the movement of terrorists because they would be forced to use less visible means of communication and transport, which means real terrorists probably aren't on the list at all, which completely contradicts the stated purpose of this "security measure". It's asinine.

Ooh, a Lego MMORPG (1)

Impy the Impiuos Imp (442658) | about 7 months ago | (#46604069)

1 person? Maybe this just shows the incredible accuracy with which the government determines these things!

(Looks at human history briefly.). No. No...hehehe no.

The Handmaid's Tale (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46604165)

Time to reread the chapter in The Handmaid's Tale where she can't buy cigarettes because her credit id no longer works.

how is no fly not a first amendment violation? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46604185)

aren't all travel restrictions inherently an interference with the right to peaceably assemble?

of course since the new deal supreme court cases the constitution has been fundamentally meaningless so whatever carry on

Re:how is no fly not a first amendment violation? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46604583)

Apart from the fact they have the biggest Guns on their side you could argue without the Constitution the Supreme has no legitimacy.

no reasonable options (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46604199)

How in the hell is this allowed to persist? There are no reasonable options to knowing if someone is on the list? No structured way of correcting errors without going in front of a judge? We need a more direct way of remedying such bullshit because all we can choose if we put one asshole democrat who supports this shit or an asshole republican who supports this shit. This is supposed to be OUR government and citizens are supposed to wield the power to change things. This country is run more and more like a corrupt dictatorship.

Re:no reasonable options (1)

camperdave (969942) | about 7 months ago | (#46604267)

How in the hell is this allowed to persist?

Complacency of the citizenry, plain and simple.

Re:no reasonable options (1)

CohibaVancouver (864662) | about 7 months ago | (#46604675)

How in the hell is this allowed to persist?

A majority of the citizens that vote don't care.

Re:no reasonable options (2)

meta-monkey (321000) | about 7 months ago | (#46604813)

Not necessarily. I thought Obama was going to end this shit. Call me gullible, but that's the only reason I held my nose and voted for him in 2008. "At least we can stop bombing people and shut down gitmo..." Haha, nope, joke's on me!

Re:no reasonable options (1)

John.Banister (1291556) | about 7 months ago | (#46604887)

As I understand it, airlines can't avoid the TSA regulating their airports owing to the ownership of the land on which the airports are found. Amtrak has had much better success at throwing the TSA out from time to time because they own the land on which they operate. On a number of occasions, I rode the Saab 340 from Anchorage to Dutch Harbor without the benefit of the TSA. That's a long flight with a short runway. If there's over 100k people who want to fly and can't, perhaps there's becoming enough of a market that someone (say, with Al Maktoum family kind of money) could build a small network of small airports and start No Security Theater Airlines. I imagine that if they get rid of the dehumanizing scans and let you lock your valuables in secure checked bags, they'd get a lot more customers than just "no fly list" people.

There are still similar names and copies of lists (4, Interesting)

UnderCoverPenguin (1001627) | about 7 months ago | (#46604227)

Besides the possibility of a match to a similar name, even if only "official" copies of the the no-fly list are consulted, I would not be surprised if copies of her entry linger in the various copies of that list.

(A friend of mine who has a name similar to someone on a sex offenders' list was mistakenly added as a variant spelling of the original listing. Even after getting a court order to remove his listing, it had propagated to other copies and was eventually merged back in to the original as updates were passed around the various government agencies. He then got an order to amend his listing to state it was invalid, but (A) that merely added a new entry, with no guarantee which entry would show first, and (B), most checkers don't look beyond seeing of there is a match.)

In the mean time Obama is letting into the country (1)

3seas (184403) | about 7 months ago | (#46604233)

...http://chersonandmolschky.com/2014/02/28/obamas-america-safe-haven-terrorists/

Kinda makes the No Fly List pointless.

FUCK BETA ! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46604245)

It does not even render properly ! on FF, Win7. SHIT.

Time to change my name to something common (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46604269)

John Smith?
Teh fo?

Re:Time to change my name to something common (2)

Virtucon (127420) | about 7 months ago | (#46604427)

I prefer I.P. Freely.

Re:Time to change my name to something common (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46604779)

what about Ben Dover?
or Hugh Janus or Mike Hawk..

It only took 8 years! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46604467)

Eight. Years.

what it sounds like is Highschool.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46604491)

Seriously,I am sure at one point or another we have all had an insecure individual try to project those in-equalities on others.
Moving past that, It just an attempt by various others, to impose their misgivings..

I for one think its total BS..

but then again whom knows how the adolescent mind, right??

Perhaps Dr. Phill??

hahaha imagine the day when Dr. Phill/Oprah is actually running the free world at some point.

man imagine the Fubar!

Idea for replacing the lengthy appeals process (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46604627)

Given that the Supreme Court has upheld freedom of travel is a right, and given that the no-fly list violates that right of anybody whose name is on it:

Make the first step in the appeal process very confrontational:
Either the government describes in open court, within a short time (say, 72 hours) of the person being denied travel, that they have better-than-probable cause to prevent this person from flying -- more than just a matching or similar name -- else the government representative in court (or the first-level manager at the airport who denied travel, if the gov't is a no-show) gets locked up for contempt until the person is removed off the list and all copies.

In essence, the gov't has to submit prima facie evidence why they deny this person the right to travel; if they fail, they go to prison. And AFAIK there is no maximum limit on how long somebody can stay in prison for contempt of court.

Re:Idea for replacing the lengthy appeals process (2)

qbast (1265706) | about 7 months ago | (#46604811)

Does it include right to demand any particular mode of travel? You can always walk. See you in a month or three.

Hope for David Nelson? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46604861)

One of many links ...
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2003/jun/16/20030616-104109-4241r/?page=all

Troops (2)

DarksideDaveOR (557444) | about 7 months ago | (#46604873)

All I can think of is the old Star Wars/Cops spoof Troops:

"Suspects are guilty, period. Otherwise they wouldn't be suspect, would they?"

And Nelson Mandela (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#46604877)

Although it's kind of a moot point now ...

http://www.loweringthebar.net/2008/07/nelson-mandela.html

Lower Class White Males (1)

Princeofcups (150855) | about 7 months ago | (#46605057)

As long as the list doesn't bother any lower class white male voters, then nothing will change. Face it, the majority of voters in this country, the unwashed masses, really do not care what happens to people of other ethnicities. As a matter of fact, it makes them feel superior to see others suffer.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?