You are being watched! Maybe - If you travel by air

[mvan1]

Although this article belongs in the general area of the forum, considering that the majority of my international travel is to South America, I will place my thread here.  

I just returned from another international trip.  I travel often to Brazil and to several other foreign countries.  

Prior to leaving for my most recently completed trip, an occasional travel companion suggested that I ask for a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) report of any history of my travels in connection with the TSA “Quiet Skies” program.  

I had never heard of such a program and I had no interest in wasting time requesting something that had nothing to do with me.  

However, my friend continued to encourage me to make a request for such data.  In so doing, he showed me a report that he recently received on himself.  He was not happy with the report.  Nor with the U.S. government snooping that allowed such a meaningless report on him.   

My friend has no criminal background, was born in the United States, is not on any terror list, is highly educated, has an impressive work history and is independently comfortable, financially.  

The only thing unusual about him (or me) is that he (we) travels often to various foreign countries (mainly to Brazil, Colombia and various parts of Europe and occasionally to Asia.  

I was shocked at reading his FOIA report.  It is several pages long.  It showed that he, personally, had been singled out for “Quiet Skies” project because of his excessive travels. 

The report shows that he was followed around airports while waiting to board his flights and that an air marshal had been assigned a seat near him on at least one of his flights (what a waste of taxpayer dollars).  

There were notes in the file about my friend making several phones calls while in the airport lounge and while in line waiting to board the plane. 

There was a note that he had purchased wifi on the flight and used it for several hours.  

The report went on and on like a small-town gossip column.     

After seeing that report, I got curious and submitted a request for myself, fully expecting that there would be nothing reported on me.    

When I got home and checked my mail, my requested report had arrived.  There was a similar report prepared on me.  The report described my activities at an airport and in the airport lounge and what I did while on board my flight (put the seat back and fell asleep for a while and ate and used the restroom).  

I then did a Google search for this bizarre government program called - “Quiet Skies”  - - and, sure enough, there is such a program.   And the rules of the program allow following and monitoring harmless passengers with respect to spying on them merely because they do not conform to a typical passenger.  

I found an excellent article that was compiled by NPR that discusses the program.  Here is a link to the article:

https://www.npr.org/2018/07/30/633980912/tsas-quiet-skies-program-tracks-observes-travelers-in-the-air

If anyone is curious to see if our government is spending your tax dollars to follow you and pay an air marshal to observe your behavior while on board an airplane, or at an airport, you can request your file by going to this link and following the instructions. https://www.foia.gov/

Please don’t get me wrong, I am not angry over this nonsense.  I just find it incredible that our laws allow for such foolishness and we, as tax payers, pay for this.  

[sfcastro]

Thanks for sharing as I was totally unaware this program existed.  Did you submit your FOIA request to the TSA or other agency to get this report?  How long did it take to get your report?  The website says an average of 256 working days for simple requests so wondering if that is accurate.

[SolaceSoul]

Thanks! I just put in my FOIA request.

[RA1]

Several years ago I was listed by the US Customs as a suspected smuggler because I made so many one way trips, meaning I delivered a plane to say Europe and then returned by airline.  I had no idea of this until I was returning through JFK with a client in tow.  They opened every piece of luggage I had to include deploying my life raft (which had to be inspected and re-certified).  My client was looking at their screen and discovered the remark about possible smuggler.  Obviously this cost me time and money.

Fortunately the MEM office of US Customs shared a building with my office and they gave me good advice about handling this matter, which included writing a letter explaining my business and suggesting but not actually asking for a fOI report.  Times were a bit different then but I got off that list.

Best regards,

RA1

[mvan1]

1 hour ago, sfcastro said:

Thanks for sharing as I was totally unaware this program existed.  Did you submit your FOIA request to the TSA or other agency to get this report?  How long did it take to get your report?  The website says an average of 256 working days for simple requests so wondering if that is accurate.

Hi, it is really simple to make a request. 

Click on the link I provided in my original post, then, follow the directions to make your request. 

Yes, you send the request to the TSA which is one of several agencies listed in the link.  

Also the site says they take a long time to furnish a report to you, but in my case and in the case of my friend, it did not take long at all.  

 I think they say it takes long to protect themselves in case there is a large number of requests and/or maybe to discourage people from requesting.

In my case it took about six weeks.  I was out of the U.S. when the report arrived and there is no date stamp on the envelope.  Therefore, the report might have arrived a week or so before I returned home.   

I am now overly curious about the bizarre snooping our government does on unsuspecting law abiding citizens.  In that regard, I found another article that was presented by the Boston Globe.  Here is that article:

Welcome to the Quiet Skies

By Jana Winter

July 28, 2018

Read more: Lawmakers demand answers on 'Quiet Skies' surveillance program after Globe report

Federal air marshals have begun following ordinary US citizens not suspected of a crime or on any terrorist watch list and collecting extensive information about their movements and behavior under a new domestic surveillance program that is drawing criticism from within the agency.

The previously undisclosed program, called “Quiet Skies,” specifically targets travelers who “are not under investigation by any agency and are not in the Terrorist Screening Data Base,” according to a Transportation Security Administration bulletin in March.

The internal bulletin describes the program’s goal as thwarting threats to commercial aircraft “posed by unknown or partially known terrorists,” and gives the agency broad discretion over which air travelers to focus on and how closely they are tracked.

 

Brynn Anderson/Associated Press

 

But some air marshals, in interviews and internal communications shared with the Globe, say the program has them tasked with shadowing travelers who appear to pose no real threat — a businesswoman who happened to have traveled through a Mideast hot spot, in one case; a Southwest Airlines flight attendant, in another; a fellow federal law enforcement officer, in a third.

It is a time-consuming and costly assignment, they say, which saps their ability to do more vital law enforcement work.

 

TSA officials, in a written statement to the Globe, broadly defended the agency’s efforts to deter potential acts of terror. But the agency declined to discuss whether Quiet Skies has intercepted any threats, or even to confirm that the program exists.

Release of such information “would make passengers less safe,” spokesman James Gregory said in the statement.

 

Read the checklist

Already under Quiet Skies, thousands of unsuspecting Americans have been subjected to targeted airport and inflight surveillance, carried out by small teams of armed, undercover air marshals, government documents show. The teams document whether passengers fidget, use a computer, have a “jump” in their Adam’s apple or a “cold penetrating stare,” among other behaviors, according to the records.

Air marshals note these observations — minute-by-minute — in two separate reports and send this information back to the TSA.

All US citizens who enter the country are automatically screened for inclusion in Quiet Skies — their travel patterns and affiliations are checked and their names run against a terrorist watch list and other databases, according to agency documents.

Explore the behavior checklist

1. SUBJECT WAS ABNORMALLY AWARE OF SURROUNDINGS

(If observed, check any that apply below) | Y N Unknown

• Reversing or changing directions and/or stopping while in transit through the airport
• Attempting to change appearance by changing clothes, shaving etc. while in the airport or on the plane
• Using the reflection in storefront windows to identify surveillance
• Observing the boarding gate area from afar
• Boarded last
• Observing other people who appear to be observing FAM team and/or subject

2. SUBJECT EXHIBITED BEHAVIORAL INDICATORS

(If observed, check any that apply below) | Y N Unknown

•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  

3. SUBJECT’S APPEARANCE WAS DIFFERENT FROM INFORMATION PROVIDED

(If yes, check any that apply below) | Y N Unknown

•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  

4. SUBJECT SLEPT DURING THE FLIGHT

(If observed, check any that apply below) | Y N Unknown

•  
•  
•  

5. GENERAL OBSERVATIONS

(Provide detailed descriptions of any electronic devices in subject’s possession in AAR) | Y N Unknown

•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  

6. FOR DOMESTIC ARRIVALS ONLY

(If possible, provide identifiers (license plate, vehicle description) of pick up vehicle in AAR) | Y N Unknown

•  
•  
•  

The program relies on 15 rules to screen passengers, according to a May agency bulletin, and the criteria appear broad: “rules may target” people whose travel patterns or behaviors match those of known or suspected terrorists, or people “possibly affiliated” with someone on a watch list.

The full list of criteria for Quiet Skies screening was unavailable to the Globe, and is a mystery even to the air marshals who field the surveillance requests the program generates. TSA declined to comment.

When someone on the Quiet Skies list is selected for surveillance, a team of air marshals is placed on the person’s next flight. The team receives a file containing a photo and basic information — such as date and place of birth — about the target, according to agency documents.

The teams track citizens on domestic flights, to or from dozens of cities big and small — such as Boston and Harrisburg, Pa., Washington, D.C., and Myrtle Beach, S.C. — taking notes on whether travelers use a phone, go to the bathroom, chat with others, or change clothes, according to documents and people within the department.

Flying the quiet skies

Air marshals are following citizens to or from cities big and small, including these airports

Seattle

Minneapolis

Detroit

Boston

New York

Chicago

Harrisburg

San Francisco

Philadelphia

Washington, D.C.

Las Vegas

Charlotte

Phoenix

Myrtle Beach

Los Angeles

Atlanta

Houston

Miami

Quiet Skies represents a major departure for TSA. Since the Sept. 11 attacks, the agency has traditionally placed armed air marshals on routes it considered potentially higher risk, or on flights with a passenger on a terrorist watch list. Deploying air marshals to gather intelligence on civilians not on a terrorist watch list is a new assignment, one that some air marshals say goes beyond the mandate of the US Federal Air Marshal Service. Some also worry that such domestic surveillance might be illegal. Between 2,000 and 3,000 men and women, so-called flying FAMs, work the skies.

Since this initiative launched in March, dozens of air marshals have raised concerns about the Quiet Skies program with senior officials and colleagues, sought legal counsel, and expressed misgivings about the surveillance program, according to interviews and documents reviewed by the Globe.

Send The Boston Globe a confidential news tip

Send a tip

“What we are doing [in Quiet Skies] is troubling and raising some serious questions as to the validity and legality of what we are doing and how we are doing it,” one air marshal wrote in a text message to colleagues.

The TSA, while declining to discuss details of the Quiet Skies program, did address generally how the agency pursues its work.

“FAMs [federal air marshals] may deploy on flights in furtherance of the TSA mission to ensure the safety and security of passengers, crewmembers, and aircraft throughout the aviation sector,” spokesman James Gregory said in an e-mailed statement. “As its assessment capabilities continue to enhance, FAMS leverages multiple internal and external intelligence sources in its deployment strategy.”

 

▶ Play

Scott LaPierre/Globe Staff

Agency documents show there are about 40 to 50 Quiet Skies passengers on domestic flights each day. On average, air marshals follow and surveil about 35 of them.

In late May, an air marshal complained to colleagues about having just surveilled a working Southwest Airlines flight attendant as part of a Quiet Skies mission. “Cannot make this up,” the air marshal wrote in a message.

One colleague replied: “jeez we need to have an easy way to document this nonsense. Congress needs to know that it’s gone from bad to worse.”

Experts on civil liberties called the Quiet Skies program worrisome and potentially illegal.

“These revelations raise profound concerns about whether TSA is conducting pervasive surveillance of travelers without any suspicion of actual wrongdoing,” said Hugh Handeyside, senior staff attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union’s National Security Project.

“If TSA is using proxies for race or religion to single out travelers for surveillance, that could violate the travelers’ constitutional rights. These concerns are all the more acute because of TSA’s track record of using unreliable and unscientific techniques to screen and monitor travelers who have done nothing wrong.”

George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley said Quiet Skies touches on several sensitive legal issues and appears to fall into a gray area of privacy law.

If this was about foreign citizens, the government would have considerable power. But if it’s US citizens — US citizens don’t lose their rights simply because they are in an airplane at 30,000 feet.

— Jonathan Turley, George Washington University law professor

“If this was about foreign citizens, the government would have considerable power. But if it’s US citizens — US citizens don’t lose their rights simply because they are in an airplane at 30,000 feet,” Turley said. “There may be indeed constitutional issues here depending on how restrictive or intrusive these measures are.”

Turley, who has testified before Congress on privacy protection, said the issue could trigger a “transformative legal fight.”

Geoffrey Stone, a University of Chicago law professor chosen by President Obama in 2013 to help review foreign intelligence surveillance programs, said the program could pass legal muster if the selection criteria are sufficiently broad. But if the program targets by nationality or race, it could violate equal protection rights, Stone said.

Asked about the legal basis for the Quiet Skies program, Gregory, the agency’s spokesman, said TSA “maintains a robust engagement with congressional committees to ensure maximum support and awareness” of its effort to keep the aviation sector safe. He declined to comment further.

 

Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

 

Beyond the legalities, some air marshals believe Quiet Skies is not a sound use of limited agency resources.

Several air marshals, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they are not authorized to speak publicly, told the Globe the program wastes taxpayer dollars and makes the country less safe because attention and resources are diverted away from legitimate, potential threats. The US Federal Air Marshal Service, which is part of TSA and falls under the Department of Homeland Security, has a mandate to protect airline passengers and crew against the risk of criminal and terrorist violence.

John Casaretti, president of the Air Marshal Association, said in a statement: “The Air Marshal Association believes that missions based on recognized intelligence, or in support of ongoing federal investigations, is the proper criteria for flight scheduling. Currently the Quiet Skies program does not meet the criteria we find acceptable.

“The American public would be better served if these [air marshals] were instead assigned to airport screening and check in areas so that active shooter events can be swiftly ended, and violations of federal crimes can be properly and consistently addressed.”

These revelations raise profound concerns about whether TSA is conducting pervasive surveillance of travelers without any suspicion of actual wrongdoing.

— Hugh Handeyside, American Civil Liberties Union’s National Security Project

TSA has come under increased scrutiny from Congress since a 2017 Government Accountability Office report raised questions about its management of the Federal Air Marshal Service. Requested by Congress, the report noted that the agency, which spent $800 million in 2015, has “no information” on its effectiveness in deterring attacks.

Late last year, Representative Jody Hice, a Georgia Republican, introduced a bill that would require the Federal Air Marshal Service to better incorporate risk assessment in its deployment strategy, provide detailed metrics on flight assignments, and report data back to Congress.

 

Without this information, Congress, TSA, and the Department of Homeland Security “are not able to effectively conduct oversight” of the air marshals, Hice wrote in a letter to colleagues.

“With threats coming at us left and right, our focus should be on implementing effective, evidence-based means of deterring, detecting, and disrupting plots hatched by our enemies.”

Hice’s bill, the “Strengthening Aviation Security Act of 2017,” passed the House and is awaiting consideration by the full Senate.

 

Read the bulletin

The Globe, in its review of Quiet Skies, examined numerous TSA internal bulletins, directives, and internal communications, and interviewed more than a dozen people with direct knowledge of the program.

The purpose of Quiet Skies is to decrease threats by “unknown or partially known terrorists; and to identify and provide enhanced screening to higher risk travelers before they board aircraft based on analysis of terrorist travel trends, tradecraft and associations,” according to a TSA internal bulletin.

The criteria for surveillance appear fluid. Internal agency e-mails show some confusion about the program’s parameters and implementation.

Quiet Skies focuses on a person’s international travel patterns and potential affiliations. Passengers are not under investigation and their names are not on a terrorist watch list or in a screening database.

Air marshals have surveilled a businesswoman, a 

 

[Tartegogo]

The Air Marshal has to be on the flight for safety reasons.. So the fact that he is sitting next to you doesn’t cost more to the taxpayer. 

When there is no real threat on a flight, they must put the marshal next to the odd-est passenger, the one most likely to be a foreign spy or to be an interesting subject for any other reason.

This way the marshall’s presence and report could be not totally wasted tax payer’s money, some intelligence could come from it.

If there is a potential terrorist on a flight, the air Marshall will follow him around, instead. 

[Latbear4blk]

On 8/20/2018 at 12:18 PM, Tartegogo said:

When there is no real threat on a flight, they must put the marshal next to the odd-est passenger, the one most likely to be a foreign spy or to be an interesting subject for any other reason.This way the marshall’s presence and report could be not totally wasted tax payer’s money, some intelligence could come from it.

Sorry, it sounds funny. Where did you get this from? How does a foreign spy look like?

[mvan1]

20 minutes ago, Latbear4blk said:

Sorry, it sounds funny. Where did you get this from? How does a foreign spy look like?

I think he is joking. 

Go to the NPR link I provided in my post and you will see how the "Open Skies" program works.

Here is the link:

  https://www.npr.org/2018/07/30/633980912/tsas-quiet-skies-program-tracks-observes-travelers-in-the-air

[Tartegogo]

1 hour ago, Latbear4blk said:

Sorry, it sounds funny. Where did you get this from? How does a foreign spy look like?

Sorry, I didn’t mean to say anything about looks. Did I? I am thinking they might use travel history, employment, social media activity, etc. to decide where to sit the air marshall.

After all, the air Marshall has to sit next to someone. Why not maximise the chance of uncovering something, even if only by a small percentage , rather than waste his flight, giving him no surveillance role at all.

What I mean is, if an air marshall has to be present on a flight, then use him to look at someone of potential interest, in the lounge (since he has to blend in anyway, he will be waiting with everyone else) and then on the plane.

But if having no air Marshall at all is a safe option, then I understand why people complain that it is a waste of money to assign one, the chances are really slim that anything will come out of this. 

So for me the question is: is the air Marshall present anyway, in the lounge, and on most flights?

[paulsf]

Air Marshals are supposed to sit in last row, aisle seat in First Class.  

[Tartegogo]

14 minutes ago, paulsf said:

Air Marshals are supposed to sit in last row, aisle seat in First Class.  

Really, so anyone can knows who they are?  They are not really under cover? 

Well then if that is the case, not much of what I was saying is relevant. Please ignore me! 

[mvan1]

19 minutes ago, Tartegogo said:

Really, so anyone can knows who they are?  They are not really under cover? 

Well then if that is the case, not much of what I was saying is relevant. Please ignore me! 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/travel_news/article-3927028/Aisle-seat-won-t-nap-not-dressed-weather-Pilots-cabin-crew-reveal-spot-air-marshal.html

and

https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/checkpoints-borders-policy-debate/1239770-sitting-next-air-marshal.html

[Tartegogo]

5 minutes ago, mvan1 said:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/travel_news/article-3927028/Aisle-seat-won-t-nap-not-dressed-weather-Pilots-cabin-crew-reveal-spot-air-marshal.html

Thanks! 

So not very common to have one. But definitely under (poor) cover. 

[Riobard]

When he/she wakes up in the dark on a flight, does he/she still hear the screaming of the lambs? Me, I just hear the shrieking of unhappy youngsters.

[Tartegogo]

Recent air marchal related mishap: https://www.msn.com/en-us/travel/news/federal-air-marshal-mistakenly-arrested-after-being-confused-for-passenger-with-a-gun/ar-BBMifhQ?ocid=spartandhp

[floridarob]

I got my response today to my FOIA request.

 

This letter is in response to your Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to the Transportation

Security Administration (TSA) dated August 23, 2018, seeking access to anything to do with the Quiet

Skies program as reported by the Boston Globe that you might be included in.

 

TSA can neither confirm nor deny whether an individual is on a Federal government Watch List

such as the Quiet Skies List, as this information is derived from classified and sensitive law

enforcement and intelligence information and revealing Federal government Watch List status

would be highly valuable to adversaries who seek to harm the United States using commercial

aviation. This protects the operational counterterrorism and transportation security objectives of

the Federal government. Federal Watch Lists remain effective tools in the government’s

counterterrorism and transportation security efforts because their contents are generally not

disclosed.

 

The Federal government Watch Lists include the No-Fly and Selectee Lists and the larger set of

watch lists maintained by the Federal government, including the Quiet Skies List, which

constitute “Sensitive Security Information” (SSI) under the governing regulations, which may be

found at 49 CFR § 1520.5(b)(9). SSI is expressly exempted from disclosure under 49 U.S.C. §

114(r) and the implementing regulation at 49 CFR § 1520.15(a).

 

Notwithstanding the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. § 552), the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. §

552a), or any other laws, records containing SSI are not available for public inspection or

copying, nor does TSA release such records to persons without an official need to know under 49

CFR § 1520.11. Further, Exemption (b)(3) of the FOIA allows the withholding of records

specifically prohibited from disclosure by another Federal statute if the statute “requires that the

matters be withheld from the public as to leave no discretion on the issue.” 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(3).

Accordingly, TSA can neither confirm nor deny the existence of records relating to individuals

named on any Federal government Watch List under 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(3), 49 U.S.C. § 114(r)

and 49 CFR § 1520.15(a).

[Lucky]

I know that I am taking a break from posting, at least I said that I didn't feel like engaging people at the time, but here I need to say that any cute guy on the plane will be surveilled from the beginning of the trip to the end. And I am probably not the only one surveilling! My goal is not to jail him, just to get some private precious moments, usually prone but not necessarily. I will not cuff him without a request.

[mvan1]

9 hours ago, floridarob said:

I got my response today to my FOIA request.

 

This letter is in response to your Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to the Transportation

Security Administration (TSA) dated August 23, 2018, seeking access to anything to do with the Quiet

Skies program as reported by the Boston Globe that you might be included in.

 

TSA can neither confirm nor deny whether an individual is on a Federal government Watch List

such as the Quiet Skies List, as this information is derived from classified and sensitive law

enforcement and intelligence information and revealing Federal government Watch List status

would be highly valuable to adversaries who seek to harm the United States using commercial

aviation. https://www.dhs.gov/dhs-trip

 

We can thank Trump and his blond bimbo appointee, Kirstjen M. Nielsen, for shutting down the FOI on this foolish law.  That bimbo is currently, Head of Homeland Security.

Unless the letter you received is an error, it looks like I and my friend got our requests in before  Nielsen, put a stop to releasing this type information.

She is the idiot, along with Jeff Sessions, who also decided to separate children from their parents when they reached the U.S. border seeking asylum.  

It is odd that the Department of Homeland Security has not updated its web page related to its "watch list" whereon they invite passengers who have been detained or have been subjected to excessive screening (harassed by TSA at an airport) to contact them. 

Check out this page that will soon likely be removed.

https://www.dhs.gov/dhs-trip

 

[mvan1]

More lies from the Trump run TSA

https://viewfromthewing.boardingarea.com/2018/12/16/tsa-says-theyve-stopped-filing-reports-on-average-americans-in-the-airport-and-on-flights-but-its-not-true/

[pauleiro]

Are foreign visitors watched the same way ? Or even more carefully ? 

[numerito]

The US is getting crazier and crazier by the minute. I am avoiding all travel that goes there or transits there. No way. 

[mvan1]

On 8/21/2018 at 7:50 PM, paulsf said:

Air Marshals are supposed to sit in last row, aisle seat in First Class.  

That "rule" is changing soon.  No more first class seats for useless air marshalls

See this - 

https://viewfromthewing.boardingarea.com/2018/12/23/new-policy-federal-air-marshals-being-moved-to-the-back-of-the-plane-starting-friday/