Talk:No Fly List

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the No Fly List article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Aviation

This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles

This article has not yet been checked against the criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar and style: not checked Supporting materials: not checked	To fill out this checklist, please add the following code to the template call: \| b1<!--Referencing and citation--> = <yes/no> \| b2<!--Coverage and accuracy --> = <yes/no> \| b3<!--Structure --> = <yes/no> \| b4<!--Grammar and style --> = <yes/no> \| b5<!--Supporting materials --> = <yes/no> assessing the article against each criterion.

Law Enforcement Mid‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Law Enforcement. Please Join, Create, and Assess.Law EnforcementWikipedia:WikiProject Law EnforcementTemplate:WikiProject Law EnforcementLaw enforcement articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

Politics Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Does anyone know

Does anyone know if there is a listing of names on the no fly list? According to MSNBC, children under 12 are being stopped for having similar names to those on the no fly list and I don't want to name my child anything that could delay our travels. Nemequ 08:06, 31 January 2006 (UTC): The list is secret, and my MSNBC is right... children under 1 have been stopped.[reply]

Other than being stopped from boarding a plane and being told by the TSA that you're on the list (which, they aren't required to tell you about), there is NO way somebody can find out who's on that list (got this from the ACLU website). What a wonderful system.99.150.203.95 (talk) 17:36, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article needs to incorporate the notion of due process, basically a lack thereof. --Hooperbloob 07:23, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm about to post a major rewrite, and I've tried to be objective, but I'm not sure I've succeeded. Please add as much info as you can--especially to the successes section. And make use of this talk page--I'll try to keep an eye on it. Nemequ 08:06, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The old article appeared to reference a July 22, 2004 NYT article by a "Stuart Taylor", with the following extract: "The No-Fly list has caught much more than suspected terrorists along with the 1,800 terrorists the No-Fly list has caught, it has also caught more than 25,000 innocent victims." I can't seem to find anything like that. NYT has some articles by a "Stuart Taylor, Jr.", but none since 1992 [1]. I'm very curious about the 1,800 terrorists number--does anyone have more information??? Nemequ 08:13, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The section on successes is horribly biased--the source is a blog? Well I'm sure that internet site is highly reputable. We should just remove it until there's some quantifiable/substantial evidence for or against the success.

I'll bet that people with Arabic-sounding names automatically go on the No Fly List. JIP | Talk 10:56, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

TSA will now fine airlines USD $25,000 for admitting someone is on the no fly list as "releasing operational information"(see the TSA entry and source article). I know several people who were on the no fly list that came home, from US CENTCOM deployment, who went through "enhanced security" (read, everything short of a public strip search, one in front of his two year old daughter). So, the US Government doesn't trust US CENTCOM, US SOCCENT or US DoD. ALL of the individuals I know, who had such issues had, at a minimum a US SECRET clearance and a few had US TOP SECRET (with assorted alphabet soup, as needed) clearances. But what do you expect? One TSA screener approached me while I was returning to the AOR (war zone), he asked how I was doing. Upon a blank expression, he asked if I remembered him. After a bit, I remembered he was previously a security guard for Pep Boys auto parts corporate headquarters. The no fly list is another example of "Security by theater". Or more correctly, "Security by BAD theater"! One year after the NSA bragged to congress that "In one year, we'll be able to track EVERY human on the planet.", we ended up with a name based no fly list, that persists to the present! Well, at least I get the joy of PAYING for this! Thanks, Uncle SugarDaddy!

The entire 1.5 million name TSA no fly list was leaked online today. Search any news outlet, they are all covering it. Habanero-tan (talk) 02:17, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with CAPPS?

There is a lot of material in here about Computer Assisted Passenger Prescreening System which ought to go into the CAPPS article. It's not even clear if the "no-fly list" is different from CAPPS. As far as I can tell, the "no-fly list" is basically the input of data from FBI and CIA into CAPPS, as recommended by the Final Report of the Gore Commission. But it seems that usually people just use "no-fly list" to refer to CAPPS as a whole.

I don't have time to improve the article right now. But if it is still this bad in a few months, I'll try fiddling with it then. -18.252.6.136 21:05, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In doing more research, it appears that some other countries may use this list. So it probably should be kept seperate from the CAPPS article. Vegaswikian 19:43, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

pigeon poop

1800 terroist captured from the no fly list? what are your sources. This is the ONLY listing that states such. This entry is highly inaccurate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.118.0.155 (talk • contribs)

A well-founded section on "Evidence of Effectiveness" would be enlightening. 75.62.4.45 (talk) 19:05, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Maher Arar

I think we should add Maher Arar to the "False Positives and Alleged Misuses." Don't mind writing the paragraph myself, but wanted to run it by the community first. He is a Syrian-Canadian who was wrongfully suspected by the RCMP of being a terrorist, and as a result of his being on that list, he was deported to Syria from New York, and was tortured. Ierous 21:28, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Most if not all of the entries have references associated with them ... another addition would be in order if there is sufficient support from references as to the notability of the event. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 01:09, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yusuf Islam

Yusuf Islam (aka Cat Stevens) got denied aparently. should this go in the list, or is it supposed to just be a skimming? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Kaldosh (talk • contribs) 12:35, 6 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

J. Moore

“Not being able to print out boarding passes in advance and having to get to the airport three hours early for every flight is hardly an imposition compared to what Americans are enduring in Iraq. I can force myself to get used to all that extra attention from the guy with the wand whenever I walk through the electronic arches.”[2]

I have not read that post carefully, but what makes you believe Moore has ever been on the No Fly List (which would mean no flying until removed from the list) and only later been “downgraded” to the selectee list? Wikipeditor 02:11, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

References

Since little is really know about this list, if someone wishes to add 'facts', they should be cited using reliable sources. If not, the 'facts' should be deleted as unreferenced rumors. Vegaswikian 21:37, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ACLU lawsuit

Is there a Wiki article about this lawsuit that could be linked to from this article? I don't know what it's called, but if someone knows, insert it into the article. 158.104.165.201 01:12, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"secret" list

I think that "secret list" should be replaced by "restricted list" or another similar term.

Saying that the list is secret is simply denying its existence, this way, it almost looks like a conspiracy theory. --Sébastien Leblanc ^(Talk|Mail) 07:42, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

TSA logic much? It IS a secret list. The existence of the list is not in question, that is why it's not a "secret secret". Who is on the list is deliberately kept secret, so the list itself is a secret list. I don't know what kind of ridiculous thought process you have but changing it from a "secret list", because the entire list of names is kept SECRET, to "restricted list" while claiming to call it a secret list makes it seem like a conspiracy theory is POV pushing. Deliberately attempting to make a subject seem less "bad" according to your own personal opinion when the description fits it perfectly regardless of connotations is POV pushing. 124.169.91.46 (talk) 23:59, 28 April 2011 (UTC) Sutter Cane[reply]

Legal

What is the legal framework for this? I mean, to deny someone from flying, they need to have some law in place. What's the name of this law? 0xFFFF (talk) 12:39, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of Names on the No-Fly List

Would it make sense to have an article titled "List of Names on the No-Fly List?" I realize that a complete list would have a million names on it, but we don't have that list. The list/article would basically include all the names found in published articles, with citations, of course. Would this be useful and within Wikipedia guidelines? SkyDot (talk) 19:50, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can say with certainty that that sort of thing is not appropriate on Wikipedia, as it falls under the category of "indiscriminate collection of information"--essentially, nonencyclopedic trivia. See WP:NOT. Robert K S (talk) 20:49, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We have the list now. It won’t be out of Wikipedia though, for obvious reasons. Gideonrmt (talk) 03:00, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Only one watchlist?

This article makes it seem like there is only one watchlist, but are there perhaps many watchlists? Do different countries compile their own watchlists? (If so, the article should address, to the extent that such is verifiably known, how data sharing is handled between countries to promote harmonization of watchlists.) Do the various airlines keep their own independent watchlists? Is it routine for local law enforcement to place certain individuals on watchlist(s), to prevent, for example, a parolee from violating terms of probation? Robert K S (talk) 20:49, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Death penalty and Iraq war

The article claims in the intro people opposing the death penalty and the Iraq war have been added to the list. This doesn't appear to be mentioned in the article. There's mention of one person who alleged he was added for his opposition, but later on it also mentions his name is the same of someone who was charged with plotting a 'terror' attack in Canada so this appears to be a false positive. The reference given doesn't mention the no fly list at all, in fact all it mentions is a state police list and

also entered the activists' names into the federal Washington-Baltimore High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area database, which tracks suspected terrorists. One well-known antiwar activist from Baltimore, Max Obuszewski, was singled out in the intelligence logs released by the ACLU, which described a "primary crime" of "terrorism-anti-government" and a "secondary crime" of "terrorism-anti-war protesters." Sheridan said that he did not think the names were circulated to other agencies in the federal system and that they are not on the federal government's terrorist watch list. Hutchins said some names might have been shared with the National Security Agency.

So the reference given should probably be removed. Nil Einne (talk) 13:18, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the sentence from the intro because it's not directly relevant to the no fly list. I've kept it in the 'controversial cases' section with the Police statement that the suspects were not put on the terrorism watch list. twilsonb (talk) 23:52, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

NFL is not TWL

I updated the page to reflect that the No Fly List is not the same as the Terrorist Watch List. The NFL is several thousand names, the TWL is over a million names. Decolores9 (talk) 14:26, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality?

This whole article is written in a very negative tone.

As if the writer is writing on why the system shouldn't exist instead of just giving information on the system in general.

There has been more then just negatives to the system. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.41.136.65 (talk) 04:55, 15 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, yeah no. Displaying facts and severe faults in a system that they refuse to correct despite repeatedly having them pointed out why screwing with the rights of others somehow "looking bad" is a reflection of the reality of the situation and not some ridiculous idea that editors on Wikipedia are out to get them. Presenting facts and those facts making it look bad doesn't mean we need to remove them. Don't like something making you look bad? Either stop doing it, change the system itself or no longer associate with it. 124.169.91.46 (talk) 00:03, 29 April 2011 (UTC) Suttern Cane.[reply]

Ticket refund?

I purchase a ticket without knowing that I am on the list. At the check-in, the ticket is rendered useless. Do I get my money back? Henning Blatt (talk) 15:45, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

why ewe want you money back? You would have flown and been out of money anyway. Serves ewe right for being on the list. You can eat a dick meat sandwich. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.187.106.1 (talk) 17:49, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

data removed

"Spokespeople from several major airlines denied providing TSA the information, then admitted that they had done so.^{[citation needed]} TSA and the United States Department of Homeland Security (DHS) admitted that the government had inappropriately requested and used this information.^{[citation needed]}"

removed because of increased awareness of this topic and did not want uncited material lingering aand prejudicing the process. Sephiroth storm (talk) 18:54, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nelson Mandela/ANC

According to the article:

Until July 2008, Nelson Mandela and other members of the African National Congress were on the list, something that U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice called "rather embarrassing".[55] On July 5, 2008, the U.S. removed Mandela and the ANC from the list.

The one linked source which is still valid states:

The requirement applies to former South African leader Mandela and other members of South Africa's governing African National Congress (ANC), the once-banned anti-Apartheid organization. In the 1970s and '80s, the ANC was officially designated a terrorist group by the country's ruling white minority. Other countries, including the United States, followed suit. Because of this, Rice told a Senate committee recently, her department has to issue waivers for ANC members to travel to the USA.

This doesn't say anything about the No Fly List, but only that ANC members required waivers for visa applications.

The legislation which removed the ANC from the visa watch list is Public Law 110-257, which doesn't refer to the No Fly List, but rather exempts ANC members from admissibility restrictions under the Immigration and Nationality Act, and orders that they be removed from databases that are used to determine admissibility. It doesn't say anything about databases that are used for any other aviation security purpose.

Other sources I've found such as [3] similarly only refer to visa eligibility.

Seems pretty clear to me that the sources don't support the idea that Mandela or ANC members were ever on the No Fly List. ajdlinux | u t c 05:54, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on No Fly List. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 21:23, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on No Fly List. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20061213074116/http://commerce.senate.gov/hearings/testimony.cfm?id=1720&wit_id=3971 to http://commerce.senate.gov/hearings/testimony.cfm?id=1720&wit_id=3971

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 11:09, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on No Fly List. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Corrected formatting/usage for //www.wired.com/politics/security/news/2007/11/watchlist

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 05:55, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Claim that Kennedy was on the list

There is a quote in the article from The Cost of Counterterrorism: Power, Politics, and Liberty by Laura K. Donohue about Edward Kennedy and others being on the No Fly List. This has been disputed. I do not have easy access to that source. Can someone please confirm that that source actually made that claim. The quote itself didn't specify that Donohue was referring to the No Fly List. Timothy Healy, former FBI Terrorist Screening Center director disputed that claim today on CSPAN, Washington Journal. There is also a claim in the article that Kennedy himself stated that he was on the list, but there is no cited source for that other than "Senator Ted Kennedy (D-MA) told a Senate Judiciary Committee discussing the No Fly List." Sparkie82 (t•c) 14:26, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on No Fly List. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:47, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on No Fly List. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:04, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on No Fly List. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070630193824/http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070619.wxcowent19/BNStory/National/ to https://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070619.wxcowent19/BNStory/National/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:59, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Fuentes inclusion on list of abuses

At time of writing, the last entry in the "notable cases [of false positives/abuses]" section notes Nick Fuentes' addition to the no-fly list:

"In 2021, political commentator and conservative activist Nick Fuentes was placed on the No Fly List. Fuentes was an attendee at the Save America March put on by then-President Donald Trump, as well as was present at the January 6 United States Capitol attack."

The entry does not cite any explanation for why this could be considered an abuse or false positive; in fact, the current phrasing seems to make the biased assertion that restricting the air travel of someone present at the Jan-6 attack constitutes a political abuse. A look through page history shows that the edit which originally listed Nick Fuentes here included the false claim that he was not present at the attack. Said edit was made by a user under the name of "GroyperW1ki" - "Groyper" being a name for a white supremacist supporter of Fuentes - which indicates a clear personal and political bias present in this addition.

Because of this context around Fuentes' addition to the section, I am removing this entry; I am noting this here mainly to ensure anyone questioning the decision understands my reasoning. MV-Sin (talk) 04:27, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Good to hear. I made to the original edit to alter sourcing. Guess I didn't realize that changing the sourcing actually means it should be removed from the wiki altogether. Thank you! NotBrandonJones (talk) 15:05, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

2023 leak

I would like to add information to the 2023 leak but I do not know if it is appropriate. I would mostly be used the original blog post and the article by the daily dot. I think it is very important and there is much of information that should be covered. I would add information about how the list was obtained, who has access to it, the more recent leak which gave anyone access to the leak, and more. I would also like to add a little about the US response and aftermath; however, that would be better to be saved for when the US makes a real response. This leak will be one of the biggest hacks in 2023 so I think it deserves at least a little more. Thanks in advance for any feedback. Gideonrmt (talk) 03:04, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

FBI v. Firke SCOTUS

Case was ruled on. Links here. Nothing in article regarding case. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.174.73.72 (talk) 17:04, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]