News: ACLU Sues to End No Fly List
Report: Terrorist Still Plan to Use Airplanes for Terror
One of these things might inform the other.ABC:
A former Air Force officer will be one of 10 plaintiffs included in a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union today against the U.S. government challenging the country's no-fly list.National Terror Alert:
Despite billions of dollars spent on securing our nation’s airports since the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, experts say terrorists are still testing and targeting aviation security because an attack could kill a lot of people, undermine public confidence and cause significant economic damage. “It remains an incredibly high target for terrorists,” Erroll Southers, President Obama’s first choice to head the Transportation Security Administration, said. Southers had to withdraw his name from consideration due to political reasons. “It’s still vulnerable… and it would be a decisive economic blow to our country.”Yeah, let's end the no fly list. Let me go back to the first ABC link to show you what an incredibly shoddy job at reporting they do. Most of it is the kind of tragic human interest angle that you expect from journalists these days, but then there are statements like these thrown in throughout:
no government official or agency has offered any explanation for Plaintiff's apparent placement on the No Fly List or any other watch list. Nor has any government official or agency offered any of the Plaintiffs any meaningful opportunity to contest his or her placement on such a list." ... If the United States government is going to maintain a watch list and prevent people from flying, there has to be some way for people to confront the evidence against them and rebut it." ... "This is really something out of Kafka where you show up at an airport, you're told you can't fly, you not even told any reason for this ordeal, and you're not given any way to get off the list."So, at least three times the article says there's no way to get off the list. And all of these statements are given in the context of horror stories -- seemingly legitimate ones -- about people finding themselves on the list. No way off the list? They wait until the second to last paragraph of the story to reveal the ugly truth, which destroys the entire narrative:
Individuals who find themselves on the list can submit a complaint to the Department of Homeland Security's Travelers Redress Inquiry Program (TRIP). The complaint is reviewed by the agency and referred to the Terrorist Screening Center redress team.I have a feeling they simply got a presser from the ACLU, made one or two quick phone calls for quotes, edited the presser, and then printed. Biased or lazy? How about biased and lazy? Thanks to herr for one of the articles and Chief for the other.