Am I in the Terrorist Screening Database?

One of the most disturbing aspects of the whole subpoena unpleasantness over the New Year’s holiday is that the agents who came to my colleague Steve Frischling’s home allegedly threatened to revoke some of his security clearance. I wondered if they might do the same thing to me, perhaps adding my name to the Terrorist Screening Database.

I won’t leave you in suspense: They didn’t.

Yesterday I checked in for my Southwest Airlines flight to Las Vegas and this morning I passed through the TSA checkpoint without incident.

But what if they had? I’d probably be out of luck.

Under Homeland Security Presidential Directive 6, the Terrorist Screening Center (TSC) now offers “one-stop shopping” so that every government screener is using the same terrorist watchlist — whether it is an airport screener, an embassy official issuing visas overseas, or a state or local law enforcement officer on the street, according to the FBI.

The TSC allows government agencies to run name checks against the same comprehensive list with the most accurate, up-to-date information about known and suspected terrorists.

Consolidating the database under the TSC made sense. Before that, information about known or suspected terrorists was dispersed throughout the U.S. government and no one agency was charged with consolidating it and making it available for use in terrorist screening.

But what doesn’t make sense is that if your name is on the list, they can’t tell you.

According to the FBI:

The TSC cannot reveal whether a particular person is in the TSDB. The TSDB remains an effective tool in the government’s counterterrorism efforts because its contents are not disclosed.

If TSC revealed who was in the TSDB, terrorist organizations would be able to circumvent the purpose of the terrorist watchlist by determining in advance which of their members are likely to be questioned or detained.

I disagree. Revealing the names of the people on the TSC would serve several purposes, including exposing the names of people who shouldn’t be on the list and making the public aware of who is a likely terrorist. Many states publish the names of sex offenders for the same reason — to make the public aware that they may be exposed to a would-be criminal.

I plan to file a request under the Federal Freedom of Information Act to reveal the names on the TSC. When I get it, I will publish it.

  • http://www.eyeonannapolis.net John W. Frenaye

    Keep trying Chris—you will make that list yet! Good job!

  • Mike

    You’re hardly the first person to request things deemed sensitive. You are, however, even less likely to be successful. If John Gilmore (along with EPIC, EFF, and others as well) couldn’t even get the rules/laws that implement the list of names you’re looking to obtain on your own, your chances for “success” are limited, regardless of how you define success.

  • Jasper

    You should check with Adam Curry (remember him from MTV?). He got hassled by immigration quite a bit for a while. He once even recorded his hassling, but as far as I know never broadcast it.

    http://curry.com/

  • Ronda Cantin

    I think that if the TSA threatened to add the other guy who got subpeona’d to take away security clearance on flights, without any sort of proof or even inkling that he’s a terrorist, and solely for the reason that he recieved and published a security directive (that didnt have much that everyone didnt already know and wouldnt have helped anyways), The TSA should be carefully looked at because its obviously running without any concern for the law, and ethics, I could understand that finding out who sent the security directive because obviously ther person could easily other classified information, but to threaten people to try to pressure them into talking is unethical, if not illegal.

  • http://prometheefeu.blogspot.com PrometheeFeu

    I look forward to seeing it.

    BTW, a request: Can you make your whole posts available in the RSS flux. Perhaps in the same way as Ars Technica does showing the full page? It’s really much more practical to not have to use a browser and just use my RSS reader.
    Thanks

  • Caroline P.

    Go get ‘em Chris. Seriously, your logic makes a lot of sense. 2010 is shaping up to be quite a year for Elliott.org already! :)

  • Mike

    While I think it is abysmal and should result in some sort of documented discipline to the government agent who threatened this to your colleague. Unless he was actually put on the list in retaliation which would be mind boggling idiotic and a terrible use of power I do not believe it would be appropriate to disclose the list of names. This is a situation where I would expect the aid of my representative in Washington if I found myself on the list. Failing that I of course would turn to advocates like yourself Chris.

    When I weigh the consequences of discomfort for being on the list for the wrong reason (discomfort, travel delays, missed opportunities, etc.) versus the consequences of disclosing the list to those who would do harm to the innocent (terror, injury, and death). It is an easy choice for me.

    Regardless of our difference of opinion on this issue Chris I do appreciate all that you do.

  • Justin

    Unfortunately,

    Your friend caved and caved hard. I am highly disappointed here. Threats or not, he should have stood his ground like you. I am sure he would have gotten the support of the ACLU / EFF / Your legal team in defending himself. Sad day when they can intimidate someone into disclosing information. With the details he gave:

    Hired after 2009… The Email Account.. Etc, that guy is toast. All they have to do is track the IP that logged into the email (pending he didn’t proxy in or use multiple send points) , and now you have your man. Nice work Steve… Nice work = /.

  • Justin

    @ Mike,

    Give me a break. Sex Offender lists are published all the time. People are then aware and can deem whether or not they would like to live next to that individual or where their kids go.

    Matter of fact, your straw man argument fails. We have Public Records in this country for ALL CRIMES. So, should we stop publishing them. If I know “Joe” is a Murderer, what stops me from knocking on his door and asking him to be a hit man?

    Better yet, if “Tom” likes to burglarize houses, well hot damn, I can bribe him to steal some cool things.

    Hypothetical, but the same B.S. nonsense the government is dishing out. They simply want to run amok without checks and balances. Thanks Bush. Thanks for Starting this trend. As to Obama, he’s just as bad for continuing it.

  • Carrie Charney

    @ Justin: Until you have stood in Steve’s shoes under the same circumstances, you have no basis on which to criticize him. Your reaction could even depend on the time of day, what was happening or who was with you at the time, and even the demeanor of those invading your house. Sounds like the two that ganged up against Steve were nowhere near as polite as the one agent that visited Chris. It’s easy to fantasize acting like a hero when one isn’t under threat!

  • http://nextflighthome.com Pete

    I commend you for your courage! Honestly, if I ended up on the No Fly list I’d be so screwed I wouldn’t know what hit me!

    I also agree with you that the list ought to be made public. Good luck with your Freedom of Information request.

  • Justin

    @Carrie Charney,

    No matter how tough someone acts to you, they have one job. It’s to get information out of you. You have enough, to protect yourself. I am glad in his article he consulted a lawyer. However, the lawyer he talked to seemingly did not give him great advice. At least, if we base Chris’s reaction to his reaction. I wasn’t there to know how Steve was treated or not. Still, any time you are under “arrest”, threat of “arrest”, etc, it is best to shut your mouth and say nothing. Resolving the problem right then or making a statement could come back and bite you in the ass due to rushed convenience. While steve might have been ganged up on, he should have stated his right to speak to a lawyer repeatedly and get back to them later. You know, at the end of the day, he might still have had to cave. Yet, doing so immediately is not the best way to go.

  • http://www.theamericanroadside.com Ron

    Keep it up Chris. I’m sure there are many of us who admire your determination in this matter, particularly after what just happened. Many people have no idea just how life-altering a run-in with the authorities (on any level) can be. It gets romanticized in fiction and the movies, but standing your ground, when the US Government is breathing down your neck, and your kids are wondering “wassup with Dad” is quite commendable!

    Please keep us in the loop (I know you will!) on the FOIA request. As you know, it can take a LONG time!

  • Joe Farrell

    I have said this before and will say it again – never ever speak to the police who come to YOU specifically. LEO’s and non-LEO investigators at this level do not wander the streets looking for the occasional criminal or blogger disclosing specific information like that in the SD- you are a TARGET of their visit.

    When they arrive and state: we would like to speak to you- and I do not care if it is about your dog urinating on someone’s bushes, you ask them to politely leave. End of story. Give them your contact info and tell them if they wish to speak to you you will obtain counsel – maybe – and thenn they can speak to you. Once they return with a warrant issued by a Judge [or have on in their pocket] and the crappy little thing signed by some lawyer angling for a higher position, then you can STILL refuse to speak to them – Fifth Amendment – thus – you NEVER have to speak to them. If you do not speak to them – they cannot threaten you with some innocent ‘misstatement’ you made as being perjury and you hold all the cards in terms of what they want to know. Once you tell them, they hold all the cards.

    You can NEVER talk an LEO out of seeing you as a suspect if they think you are one – because – they have heard better liars than you or I could ever be. By saying nothing – you remain silent. And safe.

  • Jasper
  • Albert

    Chris,

    Honestly, I think you should have a right to find out if you are on the list. I don’t think anyone has the right to check if someone else is on the list. If one is simply checking to see if one’s own name is there, then the govt. should be forced to give the information, however checking on your neighbors, etc., is kind of a privacy violation.
    I don’t like the analogy with sex-offender lists either. Hundreds of people on those lists are assaulted or terrorized daily by the village vigilantes, and publishing all the names on the terror watch lists could lead to the same thing for those persons on that list. In both cases, if wrongly put on there, one’s good name and reputation will be ruined with little chance of recovery – even less if they are published. In fact their lives could be put at risk if the lists are made public.

  • J in venice

    i haven’t flown but once since 9-11, and then only because it was unavoidable–my father’s funeral. My state ID card [ i don't drive] had lapsed, since my son committed suicide, right as it was coming due to be renewed, and taking care of that detail slipped my mind for a long time. So i was pulled out of line at the airport by TSA and given ‘extra screening’ due to ‘having no valid current ID’. It was repeated at week’s end after the funeral, upon flying back home.I asked at the conclusion of the Special Search, and again asked the TSA by email upon getting home, whether i was now on some ‘no fly’ list?
    And like the man says, nobody will tell me.
    Numerous people have been detained and denied travel because their NAMES matched poeple on the no fly list–but there is no way to take up the matter and clear one’s name, if one is wrongly confused with the actual party the list means to stop. I liken this to our Credit Scores with the three credit bureaus. We as Individuals should lawfully have the rights to examine the information held on the government’s no-fly list that is purported to refer to OURSELVES only, and as with our credit files, the right to correct, delete, remove and clear our file of any mistakes, errors , wrongly inserted details or confusions, and to add clarifying and unique details which will make it easy for any agent to quickly determine that we are NOT the party the list is meant to apprehend, though we may have the same name, even the same birth date or country of origin or any other detail which, however astronomical the odds, could conceivably be the same as the actual person intended to be stopped. something as obvious as fingerprints, unique body defects like moles, scars, even dental details, which could readily be looked for and shown in the airport private screening alcove, would expedite the clearing and resumption of travel by people whose names were similar to the intended targets of the no-fly list.
    We have the right to view our own credit files and to correct any mistakes in them, once a year. We as individuals should have the same rights to see for ourselves if our names are on the no-fly list, and to clear our file of any errors found, and our profile moved to another database of individuals mistaken and cleared, if we are not the intended party who is KNOWN– WITH PROVABLE EVIDENCE–to be a likely travel threat.

    there are enough unique aspects to any person that can be put in their file to be sure they are not the individual intended by the list. their [our] fingerprints, a retinal scan, a DNA PCR, dental details, DOB, address, spouse, kids, employer, height, weight, all are details which a would- be terrorist would have a hard time duplicating in order to ‘pass’ in place of an innocent.
    each added detail multiplies the proof that this individual, though they man begin by having the same name, is obviously NOT the individual intended by the list.

  • J in venice

    small typo there–sorry. ‘tho they may begin by having the same name…’

    BTW, after that unpleasantness and indignity, i made a decision to quit flying, until TSA ends this stupid theatre of show and gets truly serious and effective about security. i wrote them and told them so. i continue to email them, every time i spot yet another useless practice of theirs, and can suggest a more effective one that would really work.
    i believe i’ll go and write them about this discussion, now!

  • aubreyfarmer

    The list isn’t about catching terrorists, it is about conditioning the public to accept ever more Draconian laws. You can kiss your liberty good-bye. The globalists are using fear mongering and false flag attacks to create an atmosphere of fear. Our own government is beyond the control of the people and is now being controlled by an elite group of financial oligarchs. So, shake your head and call me crazy, but if you will open your pea-brain long enough to consider the facts, you too will soon see the truth of the matter. Go to YouTube and watch “Fall of The Republic” or “The Shadow Government” or numerous other videos that state the facts which prove the emergence of a New World Order and One World Government.

  • Kevin

    I was told that becuz I was in the military and or voted for guns writes that I am a terrorist. I would like to find out if  “I am” on a terrorist list. How would I find this info.