Your Rights Online: All US Border Crossings Now Require A 'Terrorist Risk Profile'

[Bob Hubbard]

Your Rights Online: All US Border Crossings Now Require A 'Terrorist Risk Profile'


Posted by Zonk on Sunday December 02, @08:32PM
from the just-wow dept.
conlaw writes with a somewhat intimidating Washington Post article. "The federal government disclosed details yesterday of a border-security program to screen all people who enter and leave the United States, create a terrorism risk profile of each individual and retain that information for up to 40 years ... The risk assessment is created by analysts at the National Targeting Center, a high-tech facility opened in November 2001 and now run by Customs and Border Protection. In a round-the-clock operation, targeters match names against terrorist watch lists and a host of other data to determine whether a person's background or behavior indicates a terrorist threat, a risk to border security or the potential for illegal activity. They also assess cargo."

• Read More...

http://yro.slashdot.org/yro/07/12/02/2356202.shtml


I loved this part:

According to yesterday's notice, the program is exempt from certain requirements of the Privacy Act of 1974 that allow, for instance, people to access records to determine "if the system contains a record pertaining to a particular individual" and "for the purpose of contesting the content of the record."

 

[Big Don]

Sadly, this is not going to accomplish a whole lot. As porous as our borders are and considering the virtual flood of illegals who enter from Mexico unempeded how exactly does the government plan to assess the risk posed by those who enter illegally? Also, who gives a flying crap if someone leaves with evil intent? Shut the door behind them and be glad they are gone.
I would hope, however, that groups who are more likely to actually be terrorists get more attention than say, a carload of nuns... Sadly, in today's politically correct environment, this is just not likely at all...

 

[CoryKS]

Also, who gives a flying crap if someone leaves with evil intent? Shut the door behind them and be glad they are gone.

I came in here to say this. Good riddance to bad rubbish, IMO.

 

[newGuy12]

Sadly, this is not going to accomplish a whole lot.

Not to stop terrorism, no.

Also, who gives a flying crap if someone leaves with evil intent?

Well, it never hurts to "take a little peak" at whatever you can find. That is the mood these days anyway. Just another "work around" to get beyond all of those pesky civil liberties.

Also, per Pat Buchanan, there's no need to secure the borders. Soon they will be open enough anyway, once the North American Union comes into fruition.

 

[Tez3]

Sadly, this is not going to accomplish a whole lot. As porous as our borders are and considering the virtual flood of illegals who enter from Mexico unempeded how exactly does the government plan to assess the risk posed by those who enter illegally? Also, who gives a flying crap if someone leaves with evil intent? Shut the door behind them and be glad they are gone.
I would hope, however, that groups who are more likely to actually be terrorists get more attention than say, a carload of nuns... Sadly, in today's politically correct environment, this is just not likely at all...

Well the rest of the world just might care! I wouldn't be too chuffed if you export terrorists to my country and here's us thinking we have a special relationship.

 

[CoryKS]

Well the rest of the world just might care! I wouldn't be too chuffed if you export terrorists to my country and here's us thinking we have a special relationship.

Well, see, that's where your country's border policy comes in. If you don't want them, don't accept them.

It's one thing to refuse somebody entry into a country, it's quite another not to let them out. That, I think, is where it becomes a rights issue.

 

[Big Don]

Well, see, that's where your country's border policy comes in. If you don't want them, don't accept them.

It's one thing to refuse somebody entry into a country, it's quite another not to let them out. That, I think, is where it becomes a rights issue.

I don't believe the US has ever stopped anyone from leaving like those socialist paradises the USSR, East Germany and Cuba did. Hell, East Germany had to build a wall to keep us from breaking in and taking advantage of their paradise...

 

[Tez3]

Well, see, that's where your country's border policy comes in. If you don't want them, don't accept them.

It's one thing to refuse somebody entry into a country, it's quite another not to let them out. That, I think, is where it becomes a rights issue.

Would you pass on then any information if you believed people were terrorists or just let them leave and say nothing? Saying that you shut the door behind them not caring anything about them sort of indicates that you don't care where they or or what they do.

 

[CanuckMA]

Well, see, that's where your country's border policy comes in. If you don't want them, don't accept them.

It's one thing to refuse somebody entry into a country, it's quite another not to let them out. That, I think, is where it becomes a rights issue.

Funny. Especially after the criticism leveled at Canada because some terrorists might have entered the US from Canada.

 

[Big Don]

Funny. Especially after the criticism leveled at Canada because some terrorists might have entered the US from Canada.

I wouldn't see that as criticism of Canada, I'd see it as criticism of the US for not policing our borders. Tom Clancy's novel The Teeth of The Tiger had the nightmare scenario, terrorists coming in through the solid as a sieve Mexican/American border and machine gunning people in shopping malls. Personally, I'd be more afraid of them exploding, but, still...

 

[Andrew Green]

With the low US dollar, it would seem a good idea to try and encourage Canadians to head a little south to do some shopping.

There are still a lot of us that do go down, but there are also a lot of us that think the US has gone so bat **** crazy these past few years that it's just not worth it.

 

[CoryKS]

With the low US dollar, it would seem a good idea to try and encourage Canadians to head a little south to do some shopping.

There are still a lot of us that do go down, but there are also a lot of us that think the US has gone so bat **** crazy these past few years that it's just not worth it.

Yup. Low prices and bat **** crazy people. Next year we're changing the sign at the border to say "Welcome to Walmart!"

 

[Rich Parsons]

With the low US dollar, it would seem a good idea to try and encourage Canadians to head a little south to do some shopping.

There are still a lot of us that do go down, but there are also a lot of us that think the US has gone so bat **** crazy these past few years that it's just not worth it.

Well I hope we can talk to someone and get this changed. I think the check and proper balance is the capability of requesting the contents of your file to correct errors. The problem is now that there is a new file that the public cannot access then the companies will lobby for national security to see the files to see who they should offer credit cards too and the best insurance discounts.

Cynic at heart.

 

[CanuckMA]

I wouldn't see that as criticism of Canada, I'd see it as criticism of the US for not policing our borders. Tom Clancy's novel The Teeth of The Tiger had the nightmare scenario, terrorists coming in through the solid as a sieve Mexican/American border and machine gunning people in shopping malls. Personally, I'd be more afraid of them exploding, but, still...

It was US politicians criticizing Canada for letting those folks into Canada in the first place. That's when all that talk about a unified NA border security was going on.

 

[Big Don]

It was US politicians criticizing Canada for letting those folks into Canada in the first place. That's when all that talk about a unified NA border security was going on.

Every nation has a responsibility to watch their own borders, and what foreign nationals coming and going do there. If terrorists came to Canada, that would indeed be Canada's problem and fault. If they come here again because we haven't secured our porous borders, and the one with Canada is even more porous than the one with Mexico because far fewer illegals come in from the north, then there will likely be one hell of a backlash, and deservedly so.

 

[Andrew Green]

They didn't do anything wrong here, nor do I imagine there would have been any reason to suspect they wanted to do anything wrong here.

Blaming Canada because a few terrorists went to Canada first, then the US is riddiculous. Thinking that Canada needs to make itself less inviting to protect the US from it's enemies is also riddiculous.

 

[Rich Parsons]

They didn't do anything wrong here, nor do I imagine there would have been any reason to suspect they wanted to do anything wrong here.

Blaming Canada because a few terrorists went to Canada first, then the US is riddiculous. Thinking that Canada needs to make itself less inviting to protect the US from it's enemies is also riddiculous.

They got into the US. Yes. It is the US fault. Did they get into Canada? Yes. It is their fault for all the damage they did there not in the US.

But in the end, I still think it really was the fault of the Terrorists.

 

[Brian R. VanCise]

They got into the US. Yes. It is the US fault. Did they get into Canada? Yes. It is their fault for all the damage they did there not in the US.

But in the end, I still think it really was the fault of the Terrorists.

Ditto!