Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Homeland Security Tracks Information on Travelers

Posted by Zonk on Fri Dec 01, 2006 02:50 PM
from the you-have-nothing-to-hide-right dept.
feuerfalke writes "Homeland Security recently disclosed a plan regarding an Automated Targeting System, or ATS, that would generate a 'terrorist risk rating' based on information collected about the traveler. This information would include things such as where they are from, how they paid for tickets, their motor vehicle records, past one-way travel, seating preference and the meals they ordered in-flight. These ratings have now been assigned to millions of international travelers, including Americans, and the ATS is exempt from many provisions of the Privacy Act — one cannot view their rating or the information used to generate it."
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] Politics: DHS Passenger Scoring Almost Certainly Illegal 181 comments
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).'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • by justkarl (775856) * on Friday December 01 2006, @02:52PM (#17071004) Homepage
    ...the makers of this system need to work on Netflix's reccomendation system.
    • by value_added (719364) on Friday December 01 2006, @03:04PM (#17071256)
      My guess is that it's more like the Slashdot moderation system. Mod +5 Safe or -1 Looks Like ann Arab to Me. Either way, I expect the courts will, at some point in the future, get their chance to meta moderate.
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        I can expand on that.

        From the Mod FAQ:
        Also, if a single user is moderated down several times in a short time frame, a temporary ban will be imposed on that user... a cooling off period if you will. It lasts for 72 hours, or more for users who have posted a ton.
        The same as being sent to GITMO. No meta mods (courts), just 'other peoples opinion' when the victim^H^H^H^H^H^H *cough* terrorist doesn't follow Slashdot groupthink.
    • Re:Sounds like.... (Score:5, Informative)

      by creimer (824291) on Friday December 01 2006, @03:25PM (#17071620) Homepage
      Nah... Remember that the Homeland Security is a front for corporate interests. Marketing departments will pay good money to know what Joe Blow was doing if he wasn't blowing up the plane.
        • Re:Execution (Score:4, Interesting)

          by Bobzibub (20561) on Friday December 01 2006, @06:16PM (#17074652)
          Living here is kinda like being "The Prisoner". They have lots of colourful marching bands. Saw some kids practicing with mock rifles last summer, as most kids back home would practice with batons. People are being watched because the US government thinks that if they know enough about you there is some causation with future action....Even I've been fingerprinted four or five times but have never been involved in anything more than a speeding ticket. Today my US friend just bought an AK47 for $500.

          This place is freak'n surreal.

  • Terrorists looooove chicken with a side of fresh veggies. Good work, TSA.
    • Re:It's True (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Chaffar (670874) on Friday December 01 2006, @03:05PM (#17071266)
      It just means that if you're an 18-25 year old male from any country that ends with -stan and you ordered your meal to be halal then you're flagged as potential terrorist. It's as simple as that.
      • First there's the games theory problem. Stop everyone from Saudi Arabia from boarding airplanes, and the killers will put locally recruited types like John Walker Lindh onto airplanes.

        Second, nobody has a monopoly on killing innocent people. From Salon's Patrick Smith, via Bruce Schneier's blog:

                * In 1985, Air India Flight 182 was blown up over the Atlantic by:

                    a. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40
                    b. Bill O'Reilly
                    c. The Mormon Tabernacle Choir
                    d. Indian Sikh extremists, in retaliation for the Indian Army's attack on the Golden Temple shrine in Amritsar

                * In 1986, who attempted to smuggle three pounds of explosives onto an El Al jetliner bound from London to Tel Aviv?

                    a. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40
                    b. Michael Smerconish
                    c. Bob Mould
                    d. A pregnant Irishwoman named Anne Murphy

                * In 1962, in the first-ever successful sabotage of a commercial jet, a Continental Airlines 707 was blown up with dynamite over Missouri by:

                    a. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40
                    b. Ann Coulter
                    c. Henry Rollins
                    d. Thomas Doty, a 34-year-old American passenger, as part of an insurance scam

                * In 1994, who nearly succeeding in skyjacking a DC-10 and crashing it into the Federal Express Corp. headquarters?

                    a. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40
                    b. Michelle Malkin
                    c. Charlie Rose
                    d. Auburn Calloway, an off-duty FedEx employee and resident of Memphis, Tenn.

                * In 1974, who stormed a Delta Air Lines DC-9 at Baltimore-Washington Airport, intending to crash it into the White House, and shot both pilots?

                    a. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40
                    b. Joe Scarborough
                    c. Spalding Gray
                    d. Samuel Byck, an unemployed tire salesman from Philadelphia
        • Monopoly - no

          95% - yes

          http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/ [thereligionofpeace.com]
        • by drkich (305460) * <dkichline.gmail@com> on Friday December 01 2006, @03:55PM (#17072180) Homepage
          * In 1986, who attempted to smuggle three pounds of explosives onto an El Al jetliner bound from London to Tel Aviv?

                                  a. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40
                                  b. Michael Smerconish
                                  c. Bob Mould
                                  d. A pregnant Irishwoman named Anne Murphy

          The answer is A. She is an Irishwoman best known as the former girlfriend of the Jordanian terrorist Nezar Hindawi. While she was pregnant with his child, Hindawi convinced her to unknowingly take an explosives-laden bag on board an El Al flight. Nezar was born in 1954 and when this was committed, 1986, he was 32 years old.

          I agree, there are other people that want to kill people, just get the facts straight.
          • by RsG (809189) on Friday December 01 2006, @04:02PM (#17072316)
            And this shows the effectiveness of profiling how exactly? I'm sorta lost how looking for a muslim male, age 17-40, would have helped in her case. Yes, the responsible party was muslim, but what we're talking about here is the effectiveness of profiling systems, and in such a case as this, they would have failed utterly.

            Remember, the GP said nothing of the root causes in each case. He merely said who was carrying the bombs - because that's who airport security is trying to catch. Your point is no refutation of his.
        • by Seraphim1982 (813899) on Friday December 01 2006, @04:03PM (#17072344)
          Second, nobody has a monopoly on killing innocent people. From Salon's Patrick Smith, via Bruce Schneier's blog:

                          * In 1986, who attempted to smuggle three pounds of explosives onto an El Al jetliner bound from London to Tel Aviv?
                                  d. A pregnant Irishwoman named Anne Murphy


          That's probably the worst example I could think of if your trying to defend Arabs from the "Arabs want to blow up airplaes" sterotype. Ann Murphy had no intention of killing anyone. Her Jordanian fiancée, Nizar Hindawi, planted those three pounds of explosives in her bag and convinced her to go on the trip. When he was captured he claimed that this was done at the urging of high ranking officers in the Syrian Airforce. In short: At the behest of Syria a "Muslim male extremist between the ages of 17 and 40" was willing to kill his fiancée, his child, and 375 passengers.
        • by Total_Wimp (564548) on Friday December 01 2006, @04:21PM (#17072666)
          You are awesome.

          In addition to the air sabotage you mentioned, one of the most feared terrorist organizations in the eighties and nineties was the IRA. True, they weren't feared much by us because they didn't strike at us, but neither did the PLO.

          Of those that did strike at us, we probably had the most fear about very loosely connected "patriots" in our country that belonged to groups that often called themselves "militias". Of these groups and, others vaguely related, various law enforcement agencies often confiscated positively scary quantities of guns and ammo. These groups largely peaked around the time of the destruction of the federal building in Oklahoma City, which Timothy McVeigh stated was done because of his sympathy, if not actual participation, with these groups.

          I think Timmy, the members of the various "militias" and the members of the IRA would be very unlikely to be swept up in the "Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40" category. In fact, plain ol' white folk in our country have a surprisingly high propensity to get caught up in emotional issues that then lead to them feeling they need to destroy something. The KKK, for example, has largely stuck to acts of terror on individuals, but has not been against firebombing a school building or such here and there. Anti-abortion activists have found both non-lethal and murderous ways to terrorize abortion clinics and doctors.
          Once again, these haven't been on planes, but does it make them any less lethal or scary? Does that fact that these things were done by largely white Westerners mean it's not actual terror? Maybe it's just that since we understand (note: understanding does notj equal agreement) many of the reasons behind these acts, they don't instill the same sense of terror in us as mostly nameless, faceless terrorist fighting for something or other in the Middle East.
          People need to remember to ask themselves what might be coming from their right if they place all their attention on their left. We need to look both ways when crossing this street. Terrorists are all over the place. If you check every guy with brown skin and a beard, you're likely to find out the hard way that your very white, nice, clean cut neighbor is the one that's really upset about [insert cause here] and thinks a few hundred people need to die to show the world just how mad he really is.

          If you want a war on Islamic Fundimentalists, then at least have the balls to say it. If you want a "war on terror", then my friend, terror starts at home.

          TW

        • by yali (209015) on Friday December 01 2006, @04:37PM (#17072948)
          First there's the games theory problem. Stop everyone from Saudi Arabia from boarding airplanes, and the killers will put locally recruited types like John Walker Lindh onto airplanes.

          As long as you're using concepts from game theory, let's introduce the concept of "zero sum." Because it's not just that profiling doesn't work - profiling may actually worsen security.

          At any given point in time, a security checkpoint has fixed amount of resources to scrutinize passengers. Under profiling, you are devoting greater manpower to searching the Arabs' bags than you would under no profiling. That means that you are actually devoting less resources to scrutinizing the pregnant Irishwomen's bags than you would under no profiling. So if the bad guys can make an educated guess about who does and doesn't fit the profile, profiling actually helps them.

          Profiling + Savvy bad guys = Worse security

          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            1927 the deadliest mass murder in US school history was perpetrated by?

            A. Tom Cruise?
            B. Beetle Bailey?
            C. Muslim extremists?
            D. A white male?

            In 1955 United Airlines Flight 629 was blown up by?

            A. Oprah Winfrey?
            B. The Riddler?
            C. Muslim extremists?
            D. A white male?

            In 1996 the record-breaking Port Arthur Massacre was commited by?

            A. Carlos Mencia?
            B. Dragons?
            C. Muslim extremists?
            D. A white male?

            The Alfred P. Murrah federal building in Oklahoma City was blown up by?

            A. Dale Earnhardt?
            B. Ghandi?
            C. Muslim extremists?
            D.
              • by WIAKywbfatw (307557) on Friday December 01 2006, @07:39PM (#17075928) Journal
                I haven't commented on Slashdot for a while, but your post is full of enough short-sightedness for me to have to do so here.

                1. The grandparent posters examples might have stretched back a while, but you're focusing on the wrong thing. His examples illustrate that terrorism and ends-justify-the-means violence is nothing new, and that people of more than one faith are capable of doing it.

                Furthermore, in a historical context, they illustrate that the current paranoia displayed to the overwhelming majority of peaceful Muslims because of a the actions of a tiny fraction of people of that faith is an inappropriate overreaction. The actions of a few don't dictate the beliefs and intentions of the many, so don't fall into the trap of making that mistake.

                2. You quote a website that clearly has an agenda, and that agenda is colouring Islam as a religion that is based on hate and which is driven by the need to murder others. Even if their stats are 100 percent accurate, do you have similar figures for other religions? Can you honestly claim that, say, Christians, Jews, Bhuddists or people of any other faith are less destructive and can you back it up with any data?

                Yes, some misguided Muslims have killed others in the name of their religion, but so have others of other faiths. Yes, some extracts of the Koran can be interpreted violently, but so can some extracts of the Bible, the Torah, etc. If you're going to sweepingly condemn people for the actions of their brethren, or for the words written in their holy texts, then I think you're going to condemn almost everybody on the planet.

                Certainly, it makes me glad to be agnostic when I see people colouring things the way that you do here. I don't know if there is a God, so I don't have a side, and I certainly don't have an agenda. As someone who's walked past IRA bombs minutes before they've exploded and whose girlfriend was on a London Underground train while some were being blown up last year I'm in no doubt that you don't have to be of a certain religion, creed, colour or cause to want to kill someone.

                There is one thing that I don't doubt though: it's that people who only see one worldview and who demonise those that have differing worldviews are part of the problem, not part of the solution. And in case it passes over your head, that applies to you just as much as it applies to the Al Qaedas and IRAs of this world.
      • Attendant: Pork sausages or Spaghetti and Meatballs?
        Passenger1: Sausages

        Attendant: Pork sausages or Spaghetti and Meatballs?
        Passenger2: Sausages

        Attendant: Pork sausages or Spaghetti and Meatballs?
        Passenger3: Meatballs

        ....... Some time later.......

        Attendant: Pork sausages or Spaghetti and Meatballs?
        Passenger n : Sausages
        Attendant: Oh, I'm sorry, we are all out, we only have Halal Chicken.
        Passenger n: ah no problem, chicken it is.

        CIA: Hey, some guy just ate the Halal Chicken. Flag him.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        I cannot believe you people. So, how many of you believe that Bush caused 9/11 by "missing obvious signs" that an attack was imminent? Now, when they go looking for those signs, everyone complains about losing freedom. You cannot have it both ways. Personally, I like freedom, thus I don't blame Bush for 9/11. However, since just about everyone did blame the government, now we have these idiotic systems put in place by the government to try to find that impossible needle in a haystack. Congratulations,
  • by yourpusher (161612) on Friday December 01 2006, @02:58PM (#17071126) Homepage Journal
    I spent a good part of my childhood just a few miles away from the lucky side of the Iron Curtain. One of the things that our teachers told us was so bad about East Germany was the fact that they "kept files on their citizens! Normal people, like you and me!"

    So what do we tell the kids, today?

    • by SydBarrett (65592) on Friday December 01 2006, @03:04PM (#17071236)
      Just call them "freedom files".
    • > I spent a good part of my childhood just a few miles away from the lucky side of the Iron Curtain. One of the things that our teachers told us was so bad about East Germany was the fact that they "kept files on their citizens! Normal people, like you and me!"
      >
      > So what do we tell the kids, today?

      We point out that one in three East Germans was helping STASI with citizen surveillance, (no doubt with similar numbers for the USSR and KGB) but only a few thousand upper Party members were actuall

    • Bah. Fingerslip before post that wastes a paragraph = teh suck. No doubt my terror rating just went up for that.

      > I spent a good part of my childhood just a few miles away from the lucky side of the Iron Curtain. One of the things that our teachers told us was so bad about East Germany was the fact that they "kept files on their citizens! Normal people, like you and me!"
      >
      > So what do we tell the kids, today?

      We point out that one in three East Germans was helping STASI with citizen surveill

  • WTF? "Uh oh... Achmed over there ordered something weird. He might be a terrorist. Ban him from the plane". This reminds me of an episode of that classic chilrden's cartoon "Wait Till Your Father Gets Home". The main character had a red scare neighbor who was always looknig for "commies" everywhere. He was saying how he'd figured out a way to get all the commies and wanted to tell the CIA about it. His method? "Find all the names in the phonebook that end with 'ski' and you've got 'em"!
    • Obviously the best way to fly is to have lots of booze and pork....well...not necessarily related to being labeled a terrorist, really booze is the only thing that makes flying bearable.
      • Naw. Sex and chewing gum are better. The sex to kill the time and the chewing gum to prevent ear popping.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      Obviously, this method is a bit more sophisticated than yours as it uses a FEW more variables. I'm not following your logic, which seems to be that if creating a profile based on one factor is stupid then creating one based on many factors is no better.
    • by Beryllium Sphere(tm) (193358) on Friday December 01 2006, @03:17PM (#17071482) Homepage Journal
      Do you think you're exaggerating?

      Muslims removed from airplane when passengers found praying to be suspicious [startribune.com]
      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        Just for the record.

        They came aboard - ok ... no problem
        They made a lot of noise - ok ... happens
        They ordered - unecessary seatbelt extensions - which are heavy metal objects - ok .. no problem
        They stood up and started praying - ok ... no problem ... makes people nervous
        They sat back down ONE AT EACH EXIT OF THE PLANE - BIG problem

        These people were trying to do one of 2 things
        -> terrorist attack
        -> get themselves removed from the plane so they could call "racist"

        You're not going to tell me these people
      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        Do you think you're exaggerating?

        Muslims removed from airplane when passengers found praying to be suspicious


        The Star Tribune article that you link to is appallingly bad. Practically speaking it is closer to disinformation about the incident and why the Imams were removed from the plane.

        How the imams terrorized an airliner [washingtontimes.com]

        Muslim religious leaders removed from a Minneapolis flight last week exhibited behavior associated with a security probe by terrorists and were not merely engaged in prayers, according to

  • by gstoddart (321705) on Friday December 01 2006, @03:00PM (#17071162) Homepage
    So if you're flagged you're screwed? If "the ATS is exempt from many provisions of the Privacy Act -- one cannot view their rating or the information used to generate it", and if you get erroneously flagged, you're screwed???

    This is like the no-fly list only worse then, isn't it? An algorithm kicks out the belief that you must be a terrorist, and anytime you go anywhere it's gonna beep and you get cold hands and lube once again.

    I hope this gets shot down by a court, because way too many scary things are being passed that exempt themselves from any sort of oversight and transparency. I can envision a lot of people deciding they don't really wish to fly to the US anymore. It's impossible to do without having your privacy invaded or running the risk of ending up on some secret CIA flight or something.
    • by 0123456 (636235) on Friday December 01 2006, @03:06PM (#17071276)
      "I can envision a lot of people deciding they don't really wish to fly to the US anymore."

      Welcome to several years ago: a heck of lot of people have already decided they don't want to visit America anymore.

      I used to travel to America regularly before 9/11, but I've only been there twice since and both of those were short stops between planes when flying to and from Canada. Why go to a country that will treat me like crap at immigration, then potentially kidnap me and ship me to Cuba if some computer tells them I might be a terrist?
      • by gstoddart (321705) on Friday December 01 2006, @03:32PM (#17071770) Homepage
        Welcome to several years ago: a heck of lot of people have already decided they don't want to visit America anymore.

        Well, it's definitely building over time, there's no denying that.

        I used to travel to America regularly before 9/11, but I've only been there twice since and both of those were short stops between planes when flying to and from Canada.

        But, even that is getting kind of scary. I seem to recall that some time last year, Gonzales issued a legal opinion that says that they can arrest and detain anyone they see fit, and short of torture (which they defined in terms or organ failure and death) they could do anything they wanted to you.

        It sounds very much like just taking a connecting flight through the US could allow you to end up in custody, declared as an illegal combatant, and locked away. I just simply don't trust people who grant themselves that much power and remove all transparency. I realize it's unlikely, it's just eerie to know they believe that they can do anything they want. Especially if other countries did the same, the US would freak out that their citizens can't go around unfettered.

        Cheers
        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          It sounds very much like just taking a connecting flight through the US could allow you to end up in custody, declared as an illegal combatant, and locked away.

          Not only does it sound like that, it is like that. There was, f'rinstance, the case of Maher Arar, a Canadian citizen, who was pulled while transferring planes and sent off to be tortured in Syria.

          I'm surprised that all foreign travellers are not making a helluvan effort to avoid touching-down in the USA.
      • by soft_guy (534437) on Friday December 01 2006, @04:08PM (#17072406)
        Don't worry. The CIA can arrest you in your own country and send you to Cuba. You don't have to visit the US for that.
    • Here's a great one for you. My wife and I got married a year ago.

      1) Hotel closed in Bahamas due to hurricane. We changed flights to Hawaii, honeymooned there.
      2) Due to a horrid set of circumstances and poor maintenance on USAIRWAYS - our flight was canceled and I think they towed the plane straight to the dump. FOUR times on & off the plane - first the lights wouldn't come on for the pilots, then warning lights wouldn't go off, etc. We went through security 3 times before we even got on a plane.
      3) T
  • There has not been an al-queda attack on american soil since 9/11, this is absolute proof that these new policies of privacy invasion and loss of freedom are working to keep you safe.
  • Great! There is absolutely nothing that can go wrong with this.

    There was a time when a certain amount of distrust of the government was considered "healthy".

    Now it gets you points on your "good american" list.

    I thought my credit score was something to worry about, how long until your "Good American" score will be used as a factor in court proceedings, federal hiring practices, etc. etc.?

    • Re:About Time! (Score:4, Informative)

      by Beryllium Sphere(tm) (193358) on Friday December 01 2006, @03:20PM (#17071528) Homepage Journal
      >how long until your "Good American" score will be used as a factor in court proceedings, federal hiring practices, etc. etc.?

      You mean like this?
      The government notice says some or all of the ATS data about an individual may be shared with state, local and foreign governments for use in hiring decisions and in granting licenses, security clearances, contracts or other benefits. In some cases, the data may be shared with courts, Congress and even private contractors.
  • by seriv (698799) on Friday December 01 2006, @03:01PM (#17071190)
    Out of all the criteria used, meals ordered stood out to me. It seems so out of place, but I imagine that it is a bit of blatant racial profiling. I am guessing that anyone who orders a meal that conforms to an Islamic diet gets a higher rating on this system. I don't think the beef or chicken will make a difference. Perhaps "racial" profiling is not the best term, since this will hunt out people based on Religion, which would be a much greater privacy concern in my mind.
  • by Avillia (871800) on Friday December 01 2006, @03:04PM (#17071234)
    *You took a one-way trip to assist in disaster aid in New Orleans or Thailand in the last two years, not knowing when you would be comfortable with/forced to leave the area.
    *You enjoy food from the Middle East (they probably have a Middle-Eastern mid-flight meal SOMEWHERE) after trying some at a small suburban restaraunt near your Pakistani coworker.
    *You paid in cash, since you recently went bankrupt and are moving somewhere that has a lower cost of living.
    *You refused to show your ID in the airport a few months ago because you packed your wallet in your checked bag by accident (Happened to me, it's tons of fun).
    *You checked out a book on Islamic extremism for your Current Issues class, for a Debate on the issue, or other such academia.

    It's good to know our previous Congress was too busy pissing themselves post-911 to have a clear enough mind to see how freaking WRONG the Patriot Act was, and then kept being embarassed by the stain enough to extend it's duration.
  • ...one way ticket to Dubai, aisle seat... with a Terrorist Meal. Oh, can I carry on this box cutter or do I need to check it with my Semtex filled laptop?
  • Where to begin? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Beryllium Sphere(tm) (193358) on Friday December 01 2006, @03:11PM (#17071370) Homepage Journal
    It's not a national security program:
    >Government officials could not say whether ATS has apprehended any terrorists.

    It can't work because of the base rate fallacy. At any false alarm rate known to man, the output will be statistically indistiguishable from 100% false alarms.

    All these problems are aggravated by the fact that they won't correct errors:
    >Nor can they see the records "for the purpose of contesting the content."

    It's not to keep airplanes safe, it's a general control tool:
    >ATS data about an individual may be shared with state, local and foreign governments for use in hiring decisions and in granting licenses, security clearances, contracts or other benefits.

  • by dgatwood (11270) on Friday December 01 2006, @03:14PM (#17071438) Journal

    Dave's instant translation from government-speak to English:

    ...'terrorist risk rating'...

    Random number generator.

    ...where they are from,

    If you're from California or one of those other blue states, you must be a terrorist.

    how they paid for tickets

    That child with the world's largest piggy bank is soooo gonna get it.

    their motor vehicle records

    Anybody who has ever driven to Florida is a suspect.

    past one-way travel

    This person seems to have a history of committing terrorist acts against aircraft.

    seating preference

    Only terrorists can't afford first class.

    The meals they ordered in-flight

    Halal is fine, but those vegetarians... man, you've gotta watch out for them. And the vegans... those are the worst.

    These ratings have now been assigned to millions of international travelers, including Americans, and the ATS is exempt from many provisions of the Privacy Act -- one cannot view their rating or the information used to generate it."

    All your base are belong to U.S.

    This concludes this translation session.

  • by blindd0t (855876) on Friday December 01 2006, @03:18PM (#17071496)

    I'm not saying this out of paranoia - I'm saying this from personal experiences. I took a trip about a year ago to attend my brother's wedding. As luck would have it, my birthday had passed while I was at my travel destination, and with all the wedding and family stuff going on, I failed to realize that my drivers license had expired while I was at my travel destination. When I went to go on my return flight, I was flagged for "special" scanning/treatment, and I've been "randomly selected" to be frisked every time I travel after that as well. They can look through my bags all they want, but I must admit I seriously dislike (though I tolerate it to avoid conflict with the TSA) being frisked like that by some stranger every time I travel.

    I'm certain some good jokes will follow this, but at least learn from my mistake: make sure your drivers license (even though is technically valid 30 days after expiration) does not expire in the midst of your travels!

  • by kevintron (1024817) on Friday December 01 2006, @03:51PM (#17072110)
    Every time a story comes up on this topic I see a few people saying we ought to start profiling Muslims, and the only reason we aren't doing it is political correctness. There's a huge flaw in that theory: The obvious and easily profiled Muslims are the openly pious ones who are most likely to be peaceful and least likely to carry out any terrorist attack.

    The real extremists, the ones who are willing to commit terrorism, are more likely to believe their religion allows them to pretend to be something else in order to defeat their enemies. They may not want to wear Western clothing, shave their beards, dye their skin pale white, take on Anglo-American names, forego their daily prayers, or eat pork rib platters for dinner, but extremists will do all of those things and more if it gives them a chance to strike at their perceived enemies. This is why ethnic profiling would be ineffective at best, and any feelings of safety it might create would be utterly false.

    The refusal to openly endorse profiling of Muslims and Middle Eastern people in general is one of the things our government is actually doing right. Most of the people in these categories are not enemies of civilization. It would be a huge strategic mistake to treat all of them as if they were.
    • by AuMatar (183847) on Friday December 01 2006, @03:19PM (#17071520)
      In the US? By number of attacks, white Christians males are responsible for the vast majority of terrorist attacks. White Christian females come in number 2. Everyone else is a distant 3rd. In yearly deathrate its the same two, but with a blip in 2001.
    • by ScentCone (795499) on Friday December 01 2006, @03:23PM (#17071580)
      Wasn't this talked about at LEAST 2 years ago?

      Hell, about four years ago, I was flagged for a super-duper security check at the Denver airport because I was flying on a last-minute one-way flight (bought with a debit card!) as I rushed in to put out a fire at a hosting operation. So there's me, looking more than a little bedraggled, with nothing but the clothes on my back and a laptop bag stuffed with some mysterious-looking replacement parts. The very nice, but very thorough inspectors told me that I should completely expect every flight I take for the following several years to end up going exactly the same way, because the profiling has some real inertia to it. They were correct, as I've gotten the (polite/thorough) treatment every time since, even when traveling on more conventionally purchased tickets. Maybe it's my warm, fuzzy personality.

      Not really. It's behavioral profiling - a lot more effective than skin-based profiling. Something that doesn't seem to get the coverage it's supposed to in recent flaps like the imam-fest the other day. (hint: loudly uttering "allah" and dispersing your group of six guys in pairs to the wrong parts of the airplane rather invites a look at your behavior). I may have the imam hair, and perhaps my shoes COULD explode after standing in them for 48 hours straight in front of a rack of servers, but I don't tend to send a lot of those other signals. On the other hand, I've met some very nice TSA people - they keep the best ones on the sidelines for the personal inspections, it seems.
      • >loudly uttering "allah"

        A religious obligation for over a billion people five times a day.

        The other noteworthy point is that *after* they were dogsniffed, searched and cleared, US Airways refused to sell them replacement tickets. US Airways pointed them to other airlines, which proves it wasn't a safety issue.
            • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

              If somebody prayed to Jesus before getting on a plane because they are afraid of flying, should they be removed as a provocative terrorist?

              No.

              Now: you and five other people do that, and do it very loudly as a group in the terminal. And, of course, you do this in the context of several years of recent history during which your bretheren have a well-documented history of doing the same thing right before an attack in a public space. But never mind that... then, you and your five friends get on a plane,