"Quiet Skies", a new TSA program that tracks ordinary US citizens as they fly
22 replies, posted
In 'Quiet Skies' program, TSA is tracking regular travelers like..
Federal air marshals have begun following ordinary US citizens not suspected of a crime or on any terrorist watch list and collecting extensive information about their movements and behavior under a new domestic surveillance program that is drawing criticism from within the agency.
The previously undisclosed program, called “Quiet Skies,” specifically targets travelers who “are not under investigation by any agency and are not in the Terrorist Screening Data Base,” according to a Transportation Security Administration bulletin in March.
The internal bulletin describes the program’s goal as thwarting threats to commercial aircraft “posed by unknown or partially known terrorists,” and gives the agency broad discretion over which air travelers to focus on and how closely they are tracked.
Ha brilliant.
It's almost like the government cannot be trusted with any information collection under any circumstances because they will always misuse it eventually.
Theirs serious doubts these bulk programs are even effective at stopping terrorism.
The government just wants more ways to collect data on its citizens. Wouldn't be surprised if the company that developed the tracking system is also getting in on the action.
I'd argue literally no one is capable of not misusing mass data.
Obviously they're looking for people who use knee defenders or in general start fights over airline chairs reclining.
Translation: we still want to track the remaining few brown people who haven't yet been ensnared by our myriad vague "lists", so that we can hopefully catch them tripping up on something minor and justify locking them in a terrorist holding cell indefinitely without a trial.
Next.
Why do we have a TSA again?
I know it's no substitute for airliners but private plane timeshares are much better in the privacy and being treated like a human being department.
Some people are just disgusted that non white people exist, many are in positions of great power. Been like that in America since the beginning.
But really I doubt this is specifically racist policy, just regular surveillance.
Fair enough, doesn't have to just be brown people. Although A) unpaid prison labor is the "next best thing" (emphasizing the air-quotes there) to reinstating slavery, and B) any prisoner who they decide to slap with a "terrorist" label just means another meat-toy to keep the more sadistic personnel occupied. Any foreign-looking guy would do for that latter part; I'm sure they could learn something about whatever from him with enough "coercing", doesn't really matter what.
I'm guessing the idea is to catch lone wolves, they have no footprint or any sign that they are up to something and if they're smart then they're virtually invisible until the act of crime, I'm guessing that by doing this they hope to collect information on people that might lead to discovering a lone wolf before the crime.
That said, this is pointless unless you have an air marshal per person on board a plane, this is something that feels like it's very hard to enforce.
There's really no valid excuse for this. It's obviously unconstitutional but on a basic ethical level government mandated stalking of unsuspected people is obviously not passable. I could sit here ranting about how obviously big-brother like this is, the obvious room for abuse, the lack of due process or appeal involved, and the additional conflict this will inspire but i dont think this matters. Too many dumb fucks have sat around for too long while too many no appeals no due process systems have been layered on society, this is just another slow turn of the dial for the kettle we're in.
So these people are guilty of not being guilty and therefore get monitored.
Makes sense.
You are untargeted therefore you are targeted.
Everybody is targeted.
Cool.
Fuck off.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5cBkhYBVt8
Has this been the case with any recent terror suspect, though? Almost all of them have been "on the radar" or "known to police".
Sorry I'm confused, not saying this is acceptable/a good thing but how is this unconstitutional? Is there something in there specifically about surveillance?
Also how is this worse than what the NSA/FBI have been doing for YEARS, having unbridled access to who you call, who you text, what websites you visit, what you put online, etc. At least this is just an air marshal being on the same plane as you.
Quiet Skies is a great name, really brings home the dystopia.
Worrying about mass surveillance seems so... old now. Like it was yesteryears battle. Like all the other shit happening at the moment is more demanding of our attention and we've let mass surveillance fall by the wayside, with stuff like social media it's just sort of assumed. Is this what apathy feels like?
In general I feel like "~the political zeitgeist~" is more focused on right wing authoritarianism and rights for immigrants/minorities. I fear its a battle we've lost anyway because we've given all our data to private companies which then sell it to our governments/political parties/other people's political parties anyway.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
Just because it's not necessarily worse than another egregious overreach of pwoer from the government doesn't mean we have no right to oppose it. Most of us oppose that shit to begin with, we oppose this as well for the same exact reasons.
Ok but there's a few problems with your argument about it violating the 4th Amendment.
1) It specifically states that in Olmstead v. United States (linked below) that "Fourth Amendment rights applied in cases of PHYSICAL intrusion but not to other forms of police surviellance" and further in Katz v. United States the Supreme Court held that "A search occurs for purposes of the Fourth Amendment when the government violates a person's "reasonable expectation of privacy"" but you have no expectation of privacy in a public place.
2) You should bear in mind that the 4th Amendment does not actually apply when it comes to the TSA. They aren't conducting "warrantless search and seizure" in fact they don't seize anything and are very clear about that if they find something in your bag not allowed on a plane (knives, bullets, etc). They're conducting administrative searches, which you (the passenger) consents to upon submitting your property for screening and you'll find many signs explaining this leading up to a security checkpoint. That's why they're very specific when you have say a knife in your bag, on the options they give you. They never confiscate anything. You can check it, mail it, give it to a friend, put it in your car, or voluntarily abandon the prohibited item. Since the FAMS is a part of TSA, the administrative search extends to their surveillance. Coupled with the fact that you have no expectation of privacy in public or on an airplane, it's not a violation of the 4th Amendment.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olmstead_v._United_States
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.