274
submitted 7 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) by juicy@lemmy.today to c/news@lemmy.world

Fikre alleges that he traveled to Sudan in late 2009 in pursuit of growing an electronics business in his native East Africa. The FBI questioned him while in Sudan, according to court filings, telling Fikre he was on the No Fly List and could be removed if he became an informant.

Fikre allegedly refused and moved to the United Arab Emirates, where he claims he was then abducted and tortured for months by the country’s secret police at the FBI’s request. After leaving the United Arab Emirates, Fikre says he moved to Sweden, filed his lawsuit and sought asylum.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] dual_sport_dork@lemmy.world 119 points 7 months ago

“In at least some instances, requiring the Government to disclose sensitive information regarding its grounds for placing or removing a person from the No-Fly List could undermine the Government’s significant interests in airline safety and the prevention of terrorist attack,” Alito wrote.

Horseshit. I don't know what part of "due process" people don't understand. If the government is limiting your right to movement, they need to prove why when questioned. No exceptions. Especially so if the individual(s) in question have not been charged with any crime.

[-] AstridWipenaugh@lemmy.world 77 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

You must have forgotten about the Patriot Act. "Terrorists" don't get rights, and we don't have to tell you why we think you're a terrorist. (And that's super fucked up and unconstitutional)

[-] Minotaur@lemm.ee 25 points 7 months ago

A terrorist is whoever says something that the current administration doesn’t agree with. And the internet makes it very, very easy to “find” terrorists

[-] PP_BOY_@lemmy.world 12 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Oh yeah, and they've got to be brown too. When white people do that they're patriots or lone wolfs.

[-] Liz@midwest.social 2 points 7 months ago

Cop City is trying to change that.

[-] frezik@midwest.social -1 points 7 months ago

Most of the Patriot Act has sunset at this point. Doesn't really exist anymore.

[-] Shirasho@lemmings.world 12 points 7 months ago

Agreed. Public safety is making everyone aware and allowing them to make informed decisions. Public safety is not hiding information hoping the problem solves itself.

[-] brygphilomena@lemmy.world 0 points 7 months ago

While I agree that this should be handled with due process, I disagree with your conclusion that this is infringing on someone's right of movement (outside of international flights.)

It would affect your access to a mode of transportation, but not the transportation itself. Something that we already have restrictions on outside of air travel, such as drivers licenses.

Regardless, it's still a fucked up authoritarian list and process.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Buelldozer@lemmy.today 104 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

The "No Fly List" is unconstitutional garbage. The list is secret, you can't get the fuck off of it, and it's absolutely riddled with errors.

I applaud SCOTUS for not allowing the Federal Government to retract Fikre's listing and then claim the issue is "moot" to avoid a potentially unfavorable ruling.

The No Fly List needs to be de-invented. Immediately.

[-] Badeendje@lemmy.world 16 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Same as the sex offender registry in the US. If it was only for a very select group of high risk people.. but they put people on there for so many small things, it has lost its purpose.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] uis@lemm.ee 1 points 7 months ago

The list is secret.

Secret document affecting people's rights? Are you sure we are not talking about Russia?

[-] Buelldozer@lemmy.today 4 points 7 months ago

Are you sure we are not talking about Russia?

People have been making that point since the thing was created and yes IMO the No Fly List really is un-American.

[-] uis@lemm.ee 2 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

I think it's more American than European

load more comments (19 replies)
[-] kescusay@lemmy.world 42 points 7 months ago

2009 was the first year of the Obama presidency, and changes at the DOJ and FBI are slow. So my first question is: Who signed off on his mistreatment? Whose name is on the order, and did that person start at the FBI with Obama, or in an earlier administration?

[-] FlowVoid@lemmy.world 54 points 7 months ago

The director of the FBI from 2001 to 2013 was Robert Mueller. Yes, that Robert Mueller.

[-] kescusay@lemmy.world 7 points 7 months ago

Interesting. It may not have been a director-level signoff, but he certainly would have hired whoever did.

[-] catloaf@lemm.ee 18 points 7 months ago

The government should not be allowed to make a case moot just because it would be inconvenient for them. I'm pretty sure that by the time SCOTUS grants cert, it's because there's a genuine legal principle that needs resolving, not just for the individual case. (At least in normal times, current court notwithstanding.)

[-] dogslayeggs@lemmy.world 16 points 7 months ago

While I'm very much in favor of a No Fly List in principle, the way it is implemented is just obviously unconstitutional.

I get that if you make the list publicly available, or even only available if you ask if you are on it, that lets potential enemies know they've been identified and possibly infiltrated. There's a reason why certain pieces of seemingly inconsequential information is classified, because if the enemy knows we know, then they know we've put a spy in their ranks. And depending on the information, it might be easy for them to identify WHO the spy is. But this has real-world impacts on real people, and if you have no idea why you are on there, that you are even on there, or how to get off of there, then that is horribly unconstitutional.

[-] DAMunzy@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 7 months ago

Why have a no fly list? If it was for unruly people that went through the court process that would be one thing (still would be unfair but less so than what we have).

[-] brygphilomena@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago

9/11. 80s plane hijackings. Numerous plane bombings.

It's not just unruly passengers.

[-] frezik@midwest.social 3 points 7 months ago

By the 90s, hijackings were already way down, and deaths due to hijjackings were rare. 9/11 shows up as a big blip on the death scale, but other than that, it was already running up against zero.

https://ourworldindata.org/airline-hijackings-were-once-common-but-are-very-rare-today

And those are worldwide numbers, not just the US.

[-] brygphilomena@lemmy.world 0 points 7 months ago

He asked why and I gave 3 reasons. I didn't say they were good reasons, or that I agree.

Leading up to 9/11 hijackings were mostly for ransom anyway. But just because hijackings were decreasing doesn't mean that wasn't a reason they were implemented.

Its hard for me to conceive of a hijacking today with some of the changes that have happened in the airline industry. But that could be a reason that a no fly list might continue to exist.

[-] DAMunzy@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 7 months ago

And the TSA was put in place for that... No?

[-] brygphilomena@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago

And we passed the patriot act.

Those incidents lead to more than one attempt at a solution.

[-] yesman@lemmy.world 16 points 7 months ago

There was a golden moment, after the raid on Trump's club, when reactionaries were openly calling to de-fund the FBI. Dems should have taken them up on that offer.

Whenever the FBI "disrupts" a terrorist plot. Until proven otherwise, I assume that the FBI masterminded the plot, provided all the materials and funding, then arrest the people they recruited. And you watch, now that focus has been shifted to reactionary terrorism, they're going to do the same shit, except replace Islamist suckers for militia patsies. It's important to remember this because these tactics shift resources to railroad dumbasses (easy) instead of investigating the actual threats (hard).

Strong arming Fikre to become a snitch reminds me of what happened to Randy Weaver.

[-] Late2TheParty@lemmy.world 9 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

When I was an Afghanistan analyst, people would ask me about the role of their NDS. My 10 second speech was to say they are like the FBI, but without any tradecraft. Guess I should have stopped after FBI. Cuz they, sure as shootin', don't have any either.

[-] Bonesince1997@lemmy.world 15 points 7 months ago
[-] Minotaur@lemm.ee 12 points 7 months ago
[-] Lemjukes@lemm.ee 2 points 7 months ago

What about the fashion police?

[-] Minotaur@lemm.ee 4 points 7 months ago

Anyone who says I can’t wear my JNCO jeans can be defunded

[-] jordanlund@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago

Wait, this guy got OFF the list?

Somebody better tell David Nelson.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2003/jun/16/20030616-104109-4241r/

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 20 Mar 2024
274 points (98.9% liked)

News

23305 readers
3821 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS