'State Secrets,' Non-Denials And Lies: How The Government Tried To Bury Its 'No Fly' List Screwup
from the the-public-will-never-achieve-'need-to-know'-status dept
Our government lies.
This is an obvious statement but it needs to be put out there in black and white. We, the people, are represented and "protected" by a government that actively lies to its constituents to cover up its mistakes. The recent case of Rahinah Ibrahim, who was accidentally placed on the government's "no fly" list and only removed after a long legal battle, illustrates this truth about our government to a sickening degree.
FBI Special Agent Kevin Kelley marked the wrong box on a single form and locked Ibrahim out of air travel for nearly a decade. The government's refusal to even examine Ibrahim's case dates back to 2005, during the the Bush Administration. By the time the case was reinstated by a federal appeals court, the screw up wasn't even a screw up. Thanks to intersecting agency databases, Ibrahim's name, even though removed from one "no fly" list was now permanently tainted by 'terrorism" associations. Bureaucracy succeeded in accomplishing one thing: retconning a paperwork flub into canon. According to the government, Ibrahim deserved to be on this list. When pressed, it would cite "terrorism," the argument-ending word deployed most frequently by government officials over the last dozen years. When pressed further, officials would simply refuse to discuss it, invoking the holiest of non-denial denials, "state secrets."
David Kravets at Wired has collected several of the deflections deployed by government officials in order to bury Ibrahim's case -- an error so easily fixed, yet ultimately so damaging to the person Agent Kelley consigned to the ranks of terrorism suspects by checking the wrong box.
Note that these are the more pernicious (and more frequently used -- especially when it comes to national security issues) form of governmental lying: the refusal to confirm or deny accusations.
“My assertion of the state secret and statutory privileges in this case precludes defendant or any other agency from making any response, including through document production or deposition testimony, that would serve to disclose classified information regarding plaintiff or any other individual; the sources, methods, and means by which classified information is collected; and information which would confirm or deny whether information regarding plaintiff or any other individual is in NCTC’s TIDE database.” — James Clapper, director of national intelligence, April 23, 2013.There are more, but these are the most indicative of the national security mindset. Eric Holder's deferral to "state secrets" in 2013 was based on the belief that a single disclosure, especially if it prompted more, would lead to terrorists gaming the no-fly list. John Tyler, then-attorney for the DOJ, claimed in 2006 that Ibrahim's complaint was so inextricably intertwined with the utility of the "no fly" list that her case should be dismissed.
“Public disclosure of the identity of individuals on the No Fly List or Selectee List would compromise the safety and security of passengers by providing terrorists with information that may reveal which of their members have been compromised, and which of their members may board an aircraft without any form of enhanced security. For these reasons, TSA’s regulations expressly prohibit the disclosure of the contents of Security Directives and Emergency Amendment…” – Joseph C. Salvator, Transportation Security Administration then-deputy assistant administrator for intelligence, May 22, 2006.
According to these statements, being mistakenly placed on the "no fly" list is just something those wrongly blacklisted will have to deal with. These citizens (and other foreigners) just need to resign themselves to the fact that they won't be boarding planes, possibly for the rest of their lives. Once you're on the list, you're on it. The list is apparently so crucial to national security that even admitting it may have blacklisted someone accidentally would turn the nation's airports into terrorist playgrounds.
A mistake was made made, but rather than looking for a solution, the government grabbed its "state secret" broom and swept it under the "neither confirm nor deny" rug.
The government cannot be so beholden to its own inflated terrorism fears that it willingly punishes a person for nearly a decade because of a paperwork error. There's plenty of middle ground between keeping the country safe and screwing someone over because an agent couldn't follow a form's instructions. But that's not the way our leaders, representatives and those beyond our limited power (the ODNI, for example) see it. To them, it's binary. It's all or nothing. Discussing the status of one person the government can "neither confirm nor deny" is on the list is portrayed to be as damaging as opening the entirety of the "no fly" list to public scrutiny.
The fear has destroyed the reality. Terrorists are supposedly one small step away from another attack on the US, even if billions of pieces of collected data have yet to result in the prosecution of these supposedly omnipresent attackers. The machinery -- some public, some private -- that thrives on this false narrative has managed to subvert due process, privacy and a variety of other constitutional "niceties" in its quest to create a lucrative, endless War on Terror. All objections are greeted with 9/11 / Boston Bombing rehashes and endless pages of retractions.
The machinery lies. The government lies. And those caught between the gears of both entities are ignored, lied to and buried underneath pages and pages of black ink and official denials.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: fbi, no fly list, rahinan ibrahim
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
That is one of the baseline hallmarks of extremism.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The machinery lies. The government lies. And those caught between the gears of both entities are ignored, lied to and buried underneath pages and pages of black ink and official denials.
Do I smell cynicism here? Still it's a quite sad truth that is plaguing our times. I thought humanity had evolved to be better than that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
BONUS!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Look - A Giant Wookie !!!! Who is asking for public disclosure of the entire lists? Those who are denied boarding have already found out they're on the list. Are they forbidden from ever telling anyone (the equivalent of receiving an NSL) ? Nope. The airline knows, the person barred knows, and probably so do their family, work colleagues and friends. That horse has bolted. And if one of the people on the list really is a terrorist, does the US really expect people to believe that they (the terrorist) won't tell their comrades ? Yep, look, there's a Wookie.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Of course, if they are afraid of something like that, then they could require that to challenge being on the list you have to initiate the challenge procedure in person, where either: 1) you'll be arrested if you're an actual terrorist, or 2) if you're an actual terrorist who they want to monitor some more before arresting, they lie to you and say you aren't on the list, thus giving the terrorists a false sense of security.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
without exposing themselves to any risk, the terrorist knows if they've been found out."
But the terrorist used a phone. There's a drone program for that. Just zap anyone near the phone. Only a pre-criminal with a guilty conscience would want to know in advance.
The "dispute number" should only be available to individuals turned back (and it would be easy to give a unique number to each person).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's not just government.
First of all, I don't see any sensible reason why a Muslim would abandon a perfectly good prayer rug.
Second, the contention that these alleged Mexican-border-crossing Muslims, if they even actually exist, are Islamist terrorists seems dubious in light of the fact that the only Islamists that have blown things up within US borders in recent years all got in on visas rather than sneaking undocumented across the Mexican border.
If these swarms of Muslims exist at all, then, it seems far likelier that they are refugees than that they are terrorists. If they were terrorists, wouldn't they be causing some trouble and sometimes getting caught at it? The only way they wouldn't be is if they had a large, long-range plan, but then we're not talking terrorism anymore but a massively coordinated bona fide stealth invasion, and there's no way that could be done without intelligence agencies intercepting stuff and finding out about it. Isolated terror cells can occasionally hide from the NSA, FBI, and others for long enough to carry out an attack, but a massive coordinated army could not hope to succeed at that.
What does all of this mean? That paranoia and, especially, anti-Muslim sentiment is not the sole province of government, and indeed is widespread on the political right among everyone from Tea Party officeholders down to random internet commentators; and that along with this paranoia and thinly-veiled racism comes an attitude that terrorism suspects and, especially, Muslims are to be regarded as guilty until proven innocent.
The fear has destroyed the reality indeed, and I fear it may already be too late to save the republic...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"What No-Fly List? Who said we had a No-Fly List? No sir, we don't collect names to be placed on any kind of No-Fly List - not wittingly."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
"You can't be on a No-Fly list if you don't know you are on a No-Fly list, can you?"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
In other words...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: In other words...
"Have won."
Bin Laden himself once said about 9/11 that the US was crumbling, and all he needed to do was kick the door and watch it collapse. He was 100% right, it's collapsing. The only question is will we bother to fix it?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: In other words...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: In other words...
It's all murky ancient history to most right now, which is the scariest thing of it all.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Surely vehicle safety improvements would prevent far more bloodshed than a war on terror...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Why aren't the major chemical spills that are poisoning the water in the US being investigated with the same zeal that they would be if they were a supposed terrorist plot?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
If We The People lied to the court there would be a punishment or sanction imposed.
Where are the punishments and sanctions for the government side of the case?
With the government receiving none, what is to stop this abuse?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Near Future Presidential Announcement
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not the first time this has happened.
Ahmad El-Maati was arrested at the US/Canada border in August 2001 with a map of Canadian government buildings in the truck he was assigned by his employer.
He was interviewed by US Border officials then and later, after 9/11, by CSIS. After some time, frustrated by the on-going-nowhere police investigation, El-Maati returned to Syria to sort out some personal affairs.
Upon arriving in Syria, he was picked up by Syrian police and tortured into making a confession that he had been a part of a terrorism plot. The plot, via other torture-generated confessions implicated two fellow Syrian-Canadians, Maher Arar and Abdullah Almalki, who were then arrested and tortured.
He later retracted this confession.
From a The Globe & Mail article, four years later: "The Globe and Mail has learned that the map -- scrawled numbers and all -- was in fact produced and distributed by the Canadian federal government. It is simply a site map, given out to help visitors to Tunney's Pasture, a sprawling complex of government buildings in Ottawa, find their way around."
It took four years before it was finally acknowledged that the suspicious map was not suspicious after all.
In late January 2007, following the findings and recommendations of Canadian Federal investigation, the government officially apologized in Parliament and compensated Abdullah Almalki, Ahmad El Maati, Muayyed Nureddin, and Maher Arar.
In an April 2009 interview with the CBC's Neil MacDonald, US Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano stated that it is the opinion of those who have reviewed Arar's case that "his status should not now be changed." After pointing out Canada's finding, she clarified this, saying "his status at least for admission to the United States purposes should not be changed."
Sigh.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Not the first time this has happened.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
That said, it really only raises the burden on the government not to abuse this power and to have rigorous oversight of it's use. If the government want to take more power and not explain itself, it inherently accepts the responsibility to use that power wisely or face the consequences in a court room.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Judge William Alsup
You stated in your ruling you were limited in what you could do.
When did you as a judge loose the power to impose punishments and sanctions for giving false testimony to the court?
James Clapper, director of national intelligence, April 23, 2013,
Lied to the Court!
Mr. Clapper might have had a choice to give a DECLARATION for this case. That he do so and gave the DECLARATION he did is the LIE.
Granted He could have been lied to about the case, but that is not the courts problem to correct, it's Mr. Clapper's job to not lie to the court, if his people lied to him, it is Mr. Clapper's problem.
Had Mr. Clapper been doing his Job, Some time shortly after his taking the position in August 2010, He should have corrected this problem. Just like the people in this position be for him should have corrected it.
As a judge you should impose punishments and sanctions to Mr Clapper. Not doing so allows Injustice to continue and get even worse.
Not doing so lets more citizens to be harmed and more cases for the courts to correct for harm that should not have happened.
Now can any court truly correct for the harms created by the government after the harm?
How many others with the government lied to the court for just this one case?
How many just did not do the job they were being paid to do?
Should the following people in addition to all the government lawyers be on the punishments and sanctions list for lies to the court?
Eric Holder, attorney general, April 23, 2013.
John R. Tyler, Department of Justice trial attorney, May 22, 2006.
Joseph C. Salvator, Transportation Security Administration then-deputy assistant administrator for intelligence, May 22, 2006
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Judge William Alsup
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Who is being terrorized?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Know what's funny about national security secrets?
What are you going to say when concentration camps outside of the U.S. itself are discovered? Oh sorry, they were already. I mean, what are you going to say if your soldiers invade foreign countries under shady excuses for securing resources? Oops, they did already.
Uh, soldiers hunting natives in occupied countries for fun? Manning got torture and 35 years or something like that for publishing the data containing those details.
In the interest of national security, it is kept a state secret that the U.S. is run by fascists from the military-industrial complex, with some alibi voting constructs in place that are indirect and unbalanced enough that they are neither Republican nor Democratic in the true sense of those words, and those who call themselves "Republicans" and "Democrats" are far more decoupled from their voters (there is a whole electorate system in between that separates votes from influence and the levers of power) than from the money and power pots of the fascist military-industrial complex running the country with changing sham presidents.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]