US "suspected terrorist" database had 1.5M names added to it in past 5 years


#1

[Permalink]


#2

Only 1,000 new names per day?

Seems legit.


#3

At that rate they’ll hit their intended target of 7 billion in no time


#4

Well, as long as they don’t do anything that will reveal their sources and methods, everything else will work out fine because preserving government secrets is the only thing that matters, right?

Right?


#5

the government… would inevitably have to expose its methods and sources if it explained at a public trial why Mohamed was put on the list.

Guess they should have thought of that little detail while developing their procedures, huh? Oh well, live and learn!


#6

If information is about them, it’s “Sources and Methods” that have to be protected.
If information is about you, it’s just “metadata”, no problem, collect the whole set.


#7

Does anyone else know the scene in the Knights of Badassdom where Peter Dinklage’s character takes mushrooms and says shit like,

“I can hear the breeze on my skin. 'Tis burnt orange. There is electricity in the air.”

… right before attacking a succubus in a LARP festival?

Why the fuck has reading the daily news become like that?


#8

Presumably, there’s some overlap but it’s astonishing how many people in the US are on the naughty list and so they’re precluded from exercising some or all of their rights.
1.5 million people are suspected terrorists
2.2 million are currently incarcerated
4.8 million are on supervised parole
10 million are undocumented immigrants
65 million have criminal records


#9

Reveal methods and sources? Maybe.

Worst of all, though, would be the loss of face. Constitutionally unacceptable.


#10

Tell the kids that just because mom or dad grounded you, that’s no reason to report them as terrorists…but seriously, paranoia and fear are ways to function…


#11

If we don’t overthrow these scumbags soon, we’re fucked.

Somewhere back down the line, we were asleep at the wheel and somehow took the turn-off marked ‘Orwellian/Kafkaesque dystopia this way’…


#12

“Unless you’re over 60, you weren’t promised flying cars. You were promised an opressive cyberpunk dystopia. Here you go.” (from here)

Also, the future is not what it used to be.


#13

For some reason, the SF I was reading in the 80s and 90s was mostly Golden Age stuff… I guess because the libraries I had access to weren’t in rich suburbs or schools and thus had older books…

And I guess that probably means I’m more inclined to pissed-off disillusionment, eh?


#14

Only about 20 years.


#15

I started on Clarke, Lem, and other hard-sf. And many obscure often Russian authors.

So I can hear you a bit too well when it comes to the disillusionment.

Reading the R&D reports brings a similar effect. Instead of excitement over new things on the market it is a disappointment that it took so long, and irritation over missing features that would be so easy to add.


#16

That reminds me; I recently realised I’d indefinitely put off starting Asimov’s Foundation series back in the day, having read as much of his other stuff as I could come across…

I should probably get stuck into it before WWIII kicks off and/or I get thrown in jail for sedition.


#17

I was promised flying cars in my cyberpunk dystopia.


#18

On the other hand, wars are said to be 1% of utter horror and 99% of utter boredom. Jail time is also mostly boring; if (when?) I get there, I have a reading list so long I’ll get out before I get to its half. Plenty of time to read then. Better play with stuff and learn the useful skills.


#19

I’m curious as to what the actual process is by which names/records get added to the list if it’s a 99% acceptance rate. It seems there’s some submission process by third party intelligence agencies and law enforcement groups that are almost always simply accepted. Based on the numbers, I’m guessing mostly as a result of NSA metadata. The FBI helpfully says that “Inclusion on the watchlist is based on specific criteria,” and that’s it. They also say that there’s a difference between the number of records and number of people on the list, as each alias or name variation gets its own record (in 2008 they claim 1 million records but only 400K names). If this is really 1.5 million records added, then it might as little as “only” 600k separate people, or if it’s truly separate names, it could be 3-4 million added records. I suspect it’s the former (just because the latter seems unmanageable). Either way it’s clearly a pretty a wide dragnet. I’d not be surprised if they added people based on having simply traveled to particular countries [“You’ve been to X and Y? You’re on the list!”] or being X degrees of separation via family or friends from someone else on a list.


#20

You’re assuming that you’ll be allowed reading material. Or reading material other than Bibles and missionary stuff. Or, if not just Bibles and missionary stuff, that it would include anything as seditious as SF/F.