Setting the Record Straight on Terror Watch Lists
Could a government agency really punish a reporter in the way a recent PJM article claimed?
Pajamas Media recently posted a story in which CNN reporter Drew Griffin claimed that he was put on a TSA watch list as retaliation for a story he did on TSA. A lot of readers found it credible, judging by the comments. That’s unfortunate, since the story is quite simply false.
Let’s start with the notion that TSA can just put people on the watch list on a whim. In fact, responsibility for the watch list rests with the Terrorist Screening Center, an interagency operation managed by the FBI. The nomination process has been outlined in public testimony a few times: there are three rigorous levels of review before a name ends up on the watch list — within the agency nominating, at the National Counter Terrorism Center, and then finally at the Terrorist Screening Center. An extremely small percentage of the watch list is used by TSA and the airlines for aviation security — TSA doesn’t add anyone on its own. (For the record, the no-fly and selectee lists combined do not exceed 50,000 individuals, and the consolidated list is smaller than 400,000 individuals.) TSA can nominate individuals to the terrorist watch list through that same three-level process, but it is extremely rare. TSA would have to meet the same criteria for nomination that other agencies do and it has to be reviewed by DHS and so on. Investigative journalism is not among the criteria.
Second, I’ve checked with TSA. They say categorically that CNN reporter Drew Griffin is not on the watch list. Not now, not then, not ever.
So why does Griffin think he’s being retaliated against? I can think of a couple of possibilities. First, TSA protocols require that some passengers be put through secondary screening on a random basis. If the passenger is prone to paranoia, of course, nothing looks random; screening is treated as confirmation that there really is a government conspiracy against the passenger.
The other possibility is that a terrorism suspect with a name like Drew Griffin ended up on the watch list, and the airlines can’t tell Drew Griffin the suspect from Drew Griffin the CNN reporter. I should begin by acknowledging that I can’t confirm the presence of a name like Drew Griffin on the list; for obvious reasons, the government doesn’t announce what names are on the list. But I can say that Griffin the reporter is not on the list and never has been.
Does that do him any good? We’ve all heard stories about people who’ve been hassled for years because they have the same name as a terrorist, and somehow no one seems to be able to do anything about it. Well, the good news is that the government has heard the stories too, and we’ve done something about it. People whose names match a terrorist’s name or alias can now straighten the error out and cut down on the hassles dramatically, just by supplying their date of birth. The bad news is that certain airlines have made this solution a lot less useful than it should be.
Page 1 of 2 Next ->
Stewart Baker is assistant secretary for policy at the DHS.
 |
 |
 |
Podcasts |  PJM Home |
Pajamas Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.
4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.
5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
The clause regarding "hate speech" has been deleted because readers criticized it as being too loosely defined. We agreed.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that Pajamas Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pajamasmedia.com.
37 Comments
1. Spinoneone:So, Mr. Baker, do tell us, please, just how often the system is updated and whether you require the airlines to immediately and instantly update their computer lists. My guess is, not often and no. My further guess is that you do not have a clue as to the real answer. And, frankly, no, we the people, do not trust TSA, the FBI, nor any of the other vaunted “security” services of the USG to get it right. You all have demonstrated, and far too often at that, that you are incompetent, self-serving bureaucrats.
Aug 6, 2008 - 3:26 am 2. plutosdad:More reasons to fly SouthWest. I hated that airline in the 90s, now it’s the friendliest and best one out there. Though that’s more an indictment of everyone else than praise for SouthWest. Still..I have less problems with them than with anyone else.
Aug 6, 2008 - 5:36 am 3. Oh Really.:I’m no fan of the reporter, and I’m not some screaming 9/11 “truther” nut, but I take a little issue with the assistant secretary stepping out to selectively show how open his agency is. Mr. Baker, perhaps you could do a few things to show how silly us “civilians” are for disrespecting the TSA:
1. Please explain how much more efficient TSA has become from 2002-2008 at detecting BOMBS being inserted into airplanes. Perhaps you could release the results from your own internal investigations and show the upward trend.
2. Please give us a round number (no exact figures necessary) of how many times TSA has ACTUALLY STOPPED A TERRORIST WITH INTENT TO HARM PASSENGERS FROM BOARDING A PLANE due to the extremely intrusive security system you are responsible for administering. 10? 100? 1000? Surely, you feel comfortable giving an order of magnitude in exchange for the hassle you expect us normal, everyday citizens to endure.
Maybe I’m a little ornery, but I sure don’t like taking the “don’t you worry your pretty little head” attitude from low-level bureaucrats whose job is to infringe on my fundamental right of interstate travel. Especially when they are basically less effective than random chance at stopping the one thing they should be good at…STOPPING BOMBS. You run a jobs program for immigrants and high school dropouts who couldn’t pass the police entrance exam, don’t give us that attitude.
Aug 6, 2008 - 5:52 am 4. MikeT:Next thing we know, Mr. Baker will be telling us that the FBI has actually acted on the IG’s report on its abuses of national security letters, and put a stop to that practice by firing recidivist agents…
I don’t envy his job one bit.
Aug 6, 2008 - 5:59 am 5. BS Detector:Spinoneone:
Oh, BS. I am constantly amazed at those who are quick to two-dimensionalize other individuals and organizations in an attempt to air their pre-conceived notions about how the world works. I don’t know who you are or what you do for a living, but the people who staff the “TSA, the FBI, nor any of the vaunted “security” services of the USG” grew up in the same nation as you, went to the same schools as you, and are just as intelligent, or ignorant, as you. They were not bred on some planet to be morons and then transported here to perform menial tasks that others don’t want to. They are three-dimensional human beings with families and friends and who care about what they do, just as much as you do.
Anyone can insult those they don’t understand by resorting to simplistic stereotypes like “government hack” and so on, but the reality is, there are no super-moronic, nor super-intelligent, people out there bent on screwing everyone else. They are just normal people trying to do their jobs in an incredible complex environment whose actions are easily twisted by others who have an agenda. Grow up and stop seeing ghosts.
Aug 6, 2008 - 6:03 am 6. Drill Thrawl:“In the short run, the airlines will continue to manage the screening process. Southwest spent the money and took the time to modify its computers and thereby save its passengers from false matches. Good for them.”
Ah yes. It is never the gubment’s fault. Sorry, not buying it.
Aug 6, 2008 - 6:06 am 7. Ric Locke:Yeah, right.
So you’ve got this nicely elaborate procedure for putting people on the watch list. It boils down to “three bureaucrats at three different agencies have to agree”, and since the bureaucrats will be embarrassed if a name that’s proposed but not listed turns out to be a bad guy, and there’s no penalty whatever (to the bureaucrats) for hassling somebody who shouldn’t be on the list, simple CYA insures that the list will grow without limit.
Two questions.
First, what’s the procedure for getting off the list? Does such a procedure even exist? Does it require Congressional influence? an Executive Order? divine intervention?
Second, what’s the procedure for ensuring that an airline is using the current list? Once the list has been published it will proliferate into multiple copies. Is there any procedure for checking to see if the list that’s being used is the current one? Any penalty for using an outdated list?
Of course the answers are “None” and “None”. We all have become acutely familiar with how bureaucracies work.
Aug 6, 2008 - 6:11 am 8. GM Roper:Spinoneone: “And, frankly, no, we the people, do not trust TSA, the FBI, nor any of the other vaunted “security” services of the USG to get it right.”
Actually, many of “we the people” would like to thank the TSA, FBI and other “vaunted ’security’” services for getting it right most of the time. As for you others, there are medications that can help you!
Aug 6, 2008 - 6:45 am 9. Glenn Beebe:My son is a federal agent for a homeland security agency and is authorized to fly armed. His ID Tag has a big red “A” superimposed on it giving him access to all areas of airports and allowing him to fly armed. He has been detained 3x, twice by TSA and once by an idiotic American Airlines security officer in London, not for carring an authorized firearm but because he was carrying “HANDCUFFS”! IN Miami and New York the TSA agents involved were informed that they were subject to arrest for interfereing with a Federal Officer in pursuit of his duties. In London, the AA idiot was escorted from the airplane by the infuriated AA pilot who welcomed federal agents aboard because they made his airplane safer.
Aug 6, 2008 - 6:48 am 10. Mwalimu Daudi:These are the room temperature IQ’s that Mr Baker
believes will solve our flying problems when TSA takes over the system. The incredible arrogance of bureaucracy continues unabated.
Several comments missed the point – a CNN reporter falsely claimed that the government retaliated against him. It’s the Joe Wilson/Valerie Plame fraud all over again.
Aug 6, 2008 - 8:02 am 11. Henway:I’m pleased Mr. Baker bothered to reply in this forum. It read to me with a minimum of roundabout jargon, even if I still have questions about the procedures- freshness of the list, process for name removals, etc. I think more such transparency from these newly formed agencies will go far to gain cooperation and confidence from those of us worried about ever-creeping intrusions upon our individual liberties in the name of collective security. If something makes sense, I can be convinced. I’m not sure I’m convinced yet, but I’m glad the channels are open. Thanks.
Aug 6, 2008 - 8:07 am 12. finprof:If you always match and end up getting groped, then sorry, Mister Bureaucrat: to the consumer that’s observationally indistinguishable from actually being on the lists. That spells out that the potential for systemic abuse is greater than meets the eye. After all, who would add “DREW GRIFFIN” to the list explicitly when adding “DAVID GRIFFIN” would be less obvious and would still inconvenience the intended person?
Therefore, this article proves nothing about the alleged retaliation; it certainly doesn’t rule it out.
It does show how ridiculous and uncaring a bureaucracy we have, one that has allowed the false matching potential to mushroom out of control in the first place.
Aug 6, 2008 - 8:18 am 13. David Warner:I agree with Henway.
I’d like to point out to Mr. Baker that the following sentence is not true:
“For obvious reasons, the government doesn’t announce what names are on the list.”
Aug 6, 2008 - 8:24 am 14. J Richardson:Perhaps Mr Asst Sec. Baker can remind me again why in the hell we even Federalized the TSA. Oh, yeah, so he could have a job and to satisfy the Democrats who wanted even more Federal employees. And so pimply faced 19 y.o.’s would feel empowered to say “Are you questioning my authority?” a la South Park. The last one I actually saw in person and was disgusted.
Aug 6, 2008 - 8:24 am 15. Molyuk:Typical CYA garbage from a bureaucratic mouthpiece. TSA is mostly staffed by the same clowns who failed us on 9/11. Now they’re federal employees & thus even harder to fire.
Does anyone really believe it’s just a coincidence that some other guy named Griffin just happened to be added to the list immediately after Drew Griffin criticized TSA?
Why do they refuse to make the list public? Anyone actually on it will figure that out once he tries to fly. There is zero public benefit to allowing TSA to operate in secrecy.
Aug 6, 2008 - 8:44 am 16. Spinoneone:BS Detector & GM Roper
Judging by the reactions above, I seem to be in the majority. Show me, if you can, and that includes you, Mr. Baker, that anyone in the USG actually compares lists and checks against birth dates? Do you even HAVE the birth dates of the majority of people on your list? Yeah, right. How about anything except a name, which may or may not have been supplied by a foreign agency, person, or government who’s own ‘bona fides’ you are unable to verify? Sure, many of the people working for our government are good citizens; there exist, however, another group with their own ‘power trip’ on and they will continue to pursue their agendas. As to whether we are safer – probably. Is the cost too high – not proven. Are the government agents infallible – proven not to be. Are they willing to come up with an open system of easily correcting known errors and false positives – absolutely NOT. So, GM and BS, you make a point but you fail to exonerate the USG.
Aug 6, 2008 - 9:39 am 17. L.Taylor:A recent news story in the Baltimore Sun reported that, as a result of the covert infiltration of an anti abortion group and, I think, a pro-gun organization by the Maryland State Police, some folks from those groups were placed on the “Terror Watch” list.
How many governmental organizations have the ability to place a person on that list?
Aug 6, 2008 - 9:46 am 18. Pundit Joe:For those that wonder why they do not want to make the list public….
Terrorist organizations could simply review the list to see which of their agents are on it. They would know then which agents to not send on missions in order to avoid detection.
Additionally, the list would suggest to terrorists which of their members are under some measure surveillance – be it travel, banking, telecommunications, or even eyes on. If an agent appears on the list, the organization could simply cut all contact with them. Thus, further hampering efforts to gather intelligence on terror groups and actions.
Aug 6, 2008 - 9:54 am 19. Spinoneone:Pundit Joe is correct. However, please tell me why the TSA cannot remove a 7 year old in Minnesota from the list? Why does he have to do secondary every time his parents take him somewhere? Why has he been on the list since he was TWO??!!
Aug 6, 2008 - 10:43 am 20. William Hamblen:The MTV Adam Curry claims that there is another Adam Curry on a watch list, the other Adam Curry being some kind of crook. The TSA personnel supposedly all know the MTY Curry, he flies so often, but they go through the checkout each trip, anyway.
Aug 6, 2008 - 11:11 am 21. P. Jeffrey Black:This is just the same rhetoric as usual coming from the TSA. Every time they are confronted with examples of gross mismanagement of the terrorist watch list –– they blame somebody else. Now TSA says its the fault of the airlines. I wrote about this specific issue last week here:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/weblogs/aviation-security/2008/Aug/01/tsa-gags-airlines-keep-your-mouths-shut-or-else/
Aug 6, 2008 - 11:17 am 22. Tom Paine:I think Baker gave a reasonably informative explanation of a particular issue.
Most of the responses so far boil down to: “change the subject and filibuster”.
Or the knee-jerk cynicism of loud-mouthed ignorance.
I’m glad to know you’re all so smart you never screw anything up. Now if your spouses and co-workers would just confirm that for us…
Aug 6, 2008 - 11:20 am 23. TS:Spin, because he has the same name as someone on the list. Reading is fundamental, Baker did cover this point.
Aug 6, 2008 - 11:25 am 24. Roy M:For me, the big news here is that a grown-up is taking PJM seriously enough to rebut a story.
Is this a first?
Aug 6, 2008 - 12:23 pm 25. Bugs:So if Osama bin Laden changed his name to Stewart Baker, he’d be off the hook?
Aug 6, 2008 - 1:19 pm 26. Spinoneone:TS
Aug 6, 2008 - 1:58 pm 27. CRScott:Yes, Baker covered that point. He also pointedly said they still don’t have a good solution to vetting those who complain and are found to be both right to complain and correct in their assertions. And, as he notes, the airlines pay little or no attention. What that really means is that updated lists are either ignored by the airlines [doubtful] or are done too infrequently to matter.
As someone who frequently flies on short notice with one way and round trip tickets, I am frequently subjected to the full probulation. Why? My theory is that people who buy last minute tickets are subject to closer inspection. Perhaps people like newsreporters who frequently travel on last minute tickets to the hotspots of the world trip certain criteria for suspicious behavior that results in closer inspection even though they are not watchlisted. Certainly seems far more likely than a government conspiracy. Of course we can’t gripe about the evil and corrupt administration then can we.
Aug 6, 2008 - 2:09 pm 28. 49erDweet:Thanks to the author for an interesting post. Shaking my head at the un-medicated conspiracy twerps who think their wildest fancies bear some resemblance to rationality. As for the spoiled CNN reporter? Who cares? Get a life.
Aug 6, 2008 - 3:31 pm 29. kman:‘
My guess is that Spinoneone is the type of guy who rails against the imcompetance of govt and how Big Brother is invading our privacy, but wants to nationalize healthcare. Am I correct?
Aug 6, 2008 - 3:46 pm 30. David Warner:“For those that wonder why they do not want to make the list public….”
I wasn’t wondering. I was pointing out that it was not obvious. If it were, you wouldn’t need to explain it and Baker would not have included the clause.
“the type of guy who rails against the imcompetance of govt and how Big Brother is invading our privacy, but wants to nationalize healthcare.”
If you want to stop the latter, you’ll need the support of the former.
A suggestion to Baker, with whom I am in sympathy:
When writing to the public, pretend you’re writing to your boss, or if you’ve been in the private sector, to a customer. This might improve your tone.
As a public employee, it also happens to be the case that this is exactly who you are writing to.
Aug 6, 2008 - 4:52 pm 31. roger:As an australian holder of a green card (and long-time NYC resident), I find it almost impossible to get on a plane these days without being searched, scanned, sniffed and de-shoed.
Why? I’m 53, never been arrested, courteous, clean and never travel with anything that resembles a fuse protruding from any pocket or orifice. If you were to draw up a terrorist profile, I would fit so few criteria that it wouldn’t be worth giving me a second glance — maybe not even a first.
So why do I get searched EVERY time?
Here’s my theory: As a foreigner, I help the TSA meet its quota of “random” searches. Moreover, as I’m not a Muslim, each search bolsters the stats these bureaucrats need to cover their asses.
“Look here,” they can tell the next congressional panel, “we search balding, middle-aged white Catholics, not just those Muslims (who are so easy to offend.)”
Thanks, TSA, for adding to my CV. Now, in addition to all my other attributes, I’m also a statistical justification for billions of dollars wasted on a security program that is as useles as it is costly.
Aug 6, 2008 - 7:56 pm 32. A.C.:It should be also noted that the U.S. Air Force has procedures that never, never allow nuclear weapons to get lost. We all know how well they followed those last year. It is even easier to do things to databases and computer files against regulation than it to do things with nuclear weapons against regulations. In the case of the nuclear weapons, there they were where they weren’t supposed to be, and there was no “undo” or “delete” to make them instantly go back to where they should have been. In the case of watch lists, if there are, as has been said before, several hundred thousand names on it, who really, truely, checks them all personally? Abuse is easy, notwithstanding regulations, procedures, and Mr. Baker’s protests to the contrary.
Aug 6, 2008 - 9:27 pm 33. Common Name:Errr…
I almost always fly Southwest – love ‘em. But I used to be on the watch list (I have a very common name). I couldn’t do online check-in (very important with Southwest’s seating system) and had to go to the ticket counter at the airport every time. I now get around the problem by misspelling my last name (by one letter) when booking. I wonder if Oxama Bin Laden is on the list?
But… that being said… Southwest is a great airline (perhaps the only even good one), and I believe they really try to minimize the hassle. Oh, and you did a good job hedging the oil market, too.
Aug 6, 2008 - 11:32 pm 34. John Moore:Oh, I forgot to add…
I supplied my DOB. I even went through a TSA process where I supplied them with certified documents that they requested, at some considerable trouble to myself. Didn’t work. Then I used the alternate spelling.
Aug 6, 2008 - 11:33 pm 35. GK:@Ric Locke: You said: “Two questions. First, what’s the procedure for getting off the list? Does such a procedure even exist? Does it require Congressional influence? an Executive Order? divine intervention?”
from http://www.dhs.gov/trip
Aug 7, 2008 - 10:49 am 36. Rubicon:“DHS TRIP is a central gateway to address
>>watch list misidentification issues
>>situations where travelers believe they have faced screening problems at ports of entry
>>situations where travelers believe they have been unfairly or incorrectly delayed, denied boarding or identified for additional screening at our nation’s transportation hubs”
Something tells me that in the case of the reporter, he exhibits attitudes and physical movements that lead security to be somewhat concerned about him. Whether facial expressions, comments, confrontational stances or postures, or whatever, I think its probable that “if” he has been “targeted,” it has more to do with him than it does any list!
Aug 8, 2008 - 7:38 am 37. Anonymous:I believe that I can be of asistance regarding information of strategic planning of warfare of other countries toward our Nation. Its an unusual program developed by our Country such as Edward Casy. I am in need of a new partner, the Special Forces officer that I work with,he worked with Senoir President Bush, has now began to to have major health problems, so I need a way to get information threw to the ones that have the assets to prove my information. Tammi
Sep 29, 2008 - 8:16 am