Scissors, lighters, bottles of hand lotion, the Costitution of the United States...

[Arrian]

Arrogant tool.

Yes, yes you are.

-Arrian

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
Only to a simpleton.

I realize it's beyond your limits, but stretch yourself.

[Jaakko]

Originally posted by Ming
No where in the story does it state he was one on terrorist list because of the anti Bush statements he made. The person he was talking to didn't know, and was simply guessing (peace rally) and then agreed with Walter after Walter "mentioned" his speech.

He offers up no other proof that that was the reason...
I claim BS!

That implies that you think he was rightly suspected of being engaged in terror-related activity. Do you really?

[Arrian]

No. It means that Ming is willing to consider the possibility of a clerical error of some sort (or that the entire blog post is a hoax), and so am I at this point.

-Arrian

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Arrian
No. It means that Ming is willing to consider the possibility of a clerical error of some sort (or that the entire blog post is a hoax), and so am I at this point.

-Arrian

me too. The clerk was just throwing out possibilities as presented by the old guy. And it seems the professor got to fly so it seems it was all cleared up.

[lord of the mark]

http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2007/04/debunking_the_p.html

Questioning Debunking the 'Professor On Watchlist for Free Speech' Story
Respected law professor Walter F. Murphy got flagged when flying and was told by an airport counter official that he was likely put on the watchlist because he was critical of the Administration's Iraq war. His suspicions were furthered heightened on his return flight, where he wasn't flagged for extra screening but his luggage was lost. His story is up on Balkin and reblogged by BoingBoing.

Threat Level is here to tell you that's it's 99.9 percent sure the good professor isn't on any government watchlist for giving a speech. I have no idea why the counterperson would say that individuals are put on the list for joining anti-war protests, but that's just not true.

The key question to ask about cases where children or nuns or Senators or peace activists get selected for extra screening is: Evil or Incompetent?

Woe be it for this blog to defend the country's foolish watchlist system, but after having spent more than four years reporting on watchlists, filing Freedom of Information Act requests, and talking with persons flagged by the lists, I have never seen a single case of a person being put on the list for activities protected by the First Amendment. Feel free to drop any proof you might have via email or in the comments.

I'm not even certain that in this case Murphy's name matched or was similar to a name on the list - which is what has snagged nearly every David Nelson in the country and what got Senator Ted Kennedy a dose of handheld wanding.

In this case, I would guess that Murphy was singled out randomly. He himself says he wasn't flagged on the way back, which he almost certainly would have been if he were on the 'selectee' list. (The 'selectee' list directs airlines to single out that person for extra screening, while a related list, the 'no-fly' list directs airlines to keep a person off a plane.)

I'm open to any evidence that the government has watchlisted American citizens for exercising their Constitutional rights, but I've never seen it.

The left wants to believe it is living in some version of Orwell's 1984. Threat Level believes that's a fool's prism. Around these parts, we prefer to see the world through a Kafka and Gilliam kaleidescope.

Update: American Airlines and TSA respond here.

[lord of the mark]

American Airlines and TSA Respond To Professor's Disturbing Flying Story
Earlier today, I blogged about the story of Professor Walter F. Murphy, a towering legal figure who was told when checking in for a flight that he was likely put on a government watchlist for his political activities. I followed up with the TSA and American Airlines and have tried to get in touch with Mr. Murphy.

TSA spokesman Darrin Kayser responded to questions about the no-fly list. He did not know the details of this incident but said:

Individuals who receive a boarding pass are not on a no-fly list. (ed. note: There are two lists: no-fly and selectee. The former prohibits flying, the latter gets one extra screening. If your name is like someone's on the no-fly list, you will have big problems. If your name is on or is like one on the selectee list, you will have to go the counter every time you fly and can be inconvenienced.)

TSA doesn't have an interface at ticket counters. This would have been an airline employee who didn’t speak on behalf of the TSA.

The watchlists contain only people who are known threats to aviation. If someone is simply exercising the first Amendment rights, they will not be on the list.

I asked American Airlines what they knew about the incident. Spokesman Tim Wagner had no specifics, but the story sounded as off to them as it did to me.

First, this sound really fishy:

>>"I presented my credentials from the Marine Corps to a very polite clerk for American Airlines. One of the two people to whom I talked asked a question and offered a frightening comment: "Have you been in any peace marches? We ban a lot of people from flying because of that."<<

American Airlines does not maintain the TSA security watch lists. We don't ban people - period. In fact, the TSA doesn't even "ban" many people. Our employees don't know the criteria which TSA uses to add people to the watch lists. I can't envision one of our employees making a statement like this. It's possible that a TSA or other security employee might have.

However, when a person's name is on the watch list, there are certain extra security procedures that are initiated. Essentially, the passenger can fly after undergoing this extra screening. That's all done by the TSA, though. That appears to be what happened with Professor Murphy, but you should ask the TSA - Office of Communications.

There have been numerous, highly-publicized examples of people having to go through this extra security because someone with a similar name is on the watch list. Professor Murphy can, I believe, appeal this to the TSA. This might be something you want to ask TSA about.

Let me now reiterate for all my commenters that I am not calling into question the account that Professor Murphy gave of his travels. The comments at the counter are deeply disturbing, but I believe whoever said them doesn't know what they are talking about. I'm still not convinced that Professor Murphy is on a watchlist for criticizing the president.

Check the comment threads on Orin Kerr's post as well. Other good reads include the follow-up post at Balkin and Kerr's second post.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Arrian
Yes, yes you are.

-Arrian

I'll give you arrogant.

[lord of the mark]

Prof gets picked at random.

Stupid Am Airlines clerk, speculates stupidly. Shocked prof remembers the words as even worse than they probably were.

Bloggers, who really ought to know such details as whether American Airlines knows the criteria for the TSA list, pick up the story anyway, and spread it as "proof" of the new dictatorship.

Hilarity ensues.

[Kuciwalker]

Add self-important prof decides that he's clearly above random selection. After all, everyone knows that a veteran could never perform a terrorist act, and that the airport security people can tell he's a decorated veteran just by looking at him.

[Arrian]

Sounds pretty much right, yeah.

-Arrian

[Kuciwalker]

Yes, yes I am.

[lord of the mark]

" I can't envision one of our employees making a statement like this"

Yeah, but I bet you cant envision one of them losing someones luggage, either.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
Add self-important prof decides that he's clearly above random selection. After all, everyone knows that a veteran could never perform a terrorist act, and that the airport security people can tell he's a decorated veteran just by looking at him.

How many lives have been saved, and how many terrist acts have been prevented, because of our policy of random selection of 70 year old white people? If we didn't randomly select some 70 year old white people, it'd be a victory for the terrists. After all, they hate us for our freedom...

And only a non-veteran (zit-popping doesn't count) tool wouldn't understand the point about being a decorated vet.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
How many lives have been saved, and how many terrist acts have been prevented, because of our policy of random selection of 70 year old white people? If we didn't randomly select some 70 year old white people, it'd be a victory for the terrists. After all, they hate us for our freedom...

It's funny that you keep typing up these responses that have nothing to do with the posts they quote.

hint: I never spoke to the utility of random searches.