A couple of reasons spring to mind. The obvious one would be this is a person engaged in work that gives access to restricted materials and who also appears to frequently travel to countries like Russia and China, at least from what they have written on the rest of their website. That alone might warrant suspicion of espionage or simple carelessness in handling restricted data. They also seem to be very active in online spaces and possibly they have been skirting close to the line of what they have shared, and thus triggered an alert. It wouldn't be the first time I've been aware of people thinking they are sharing harmless things that in reality are restricted. Of course there are darker possibilities here, and a guilty person presumably wouldn't admit to them in a blog.
Australia is also a member of the Five Eyes. It is not impossible that someone in the US asked Australia to add him to their list.
If nothing else, this article has further cemented in my mind the idea that you should never cross a border with a phone or laptop that you give a shit about. Ship your devices ahead of you, or stash digital copies of any important data somewhere you can get to with a clean device you bought at the destination.
It's like some of the most noble officials of previous generations who staunchly fought WWII to reverse the spread of authoritarianism, have now been replaced by a current crop who is trending in the opposite direction that their ancestors fought & died for.
I started to read the article. Then I thought "may be he is working with cryptography and that is why he is searched". And a sentence or two later he writes "Advanced Mathematics" and then "GPS". I think that is why he is being searched.
Similarly the developer of curl was not able to obtain USA visa.
Might be because a person you have associated with in the past. I use the word " associated" very loosely. You would not be aware of the associates history for example.
i read the article, and i really think the combination of stated specialties, with dual-citizenship, sides up to a profile of concern.
-- thats not to say there should be concern. there are stereptypical profiles that ask the question, what is this person capable of doing? rather than, what does this person intend to do?
and thats the problem, its difficult to titrate intent, but capability is easy to asess
but if it's based on capability solely than each of us can be reasonably suspected of prostitution, to provide an illustrative if somewhat crude example
"According to the ABF website, the MAL is for non-citizens. According to a 2013 audit, there were only 172 Australian citizens on the list at that time. What accords me this rare honour, I do not know."
There are far more than 172 Australian dual nationals.
He's referring to the number of people(with dual australian/whichever citizenship) being on the 'Movement Alert List', meaning being on the shitlist of the ABF.
I understood that's what Handmer means. I pointed out he can't be on the list simply "Because [he's] a dual citizen", as almost no dual citizens are on the list.
The author does not state how he knows he is on the MAL. It’s an important part of the story. If he doesn’t actually know, it’s more than possible it is random.
"I engaged Marque Lawyers to formalize the documentation trail and establish a formal record of governmental non-responsiveness. ... FOIA process ... What did we discover in the documents that were finally released? I am on the Movement Alert List and according to this documentation, none of the searches discovered anything of interest to the ABF."
A couple of reasons spring to mind. The obvious one would be this is a person engaged in work that gives access to restricted materials and who also appears to frequently travel to countries like Russia and China, at least from what they have written on the rest of their website. That alone might warrant suspicion of espionage or simple carelessness in handling restricted data. They also seem to be very active in online spaces and possibly they have been skirting close to the line of what they have shared, and thus triggered an alert. It wouldn't be the first time I've been aware of people thinking they are sharing harmless things that in reality are restricted. Of course there are darker possibilities here, and a guilty person presumably wouldn't admit to them in a blog.
Australia is also a member of the Five Eyes. It is not impossible that someone in the US asked Australia to add him to their list.
If nothing else, this article has further cemented in my mind the idea that you should never cross a border with a phone or laptop that you give a shit about. Ship your devices ahead of you, or stash digital copies of any important data somewhere you can get to with a clean device you bought at the destination.
This really sucks.
It's like some of the most noble officials of previous generations who staunchly fought WWII to reverse the spread of authoritarianism, have now been replaced by a current crop who is trending in the opposite direction that their ancestors fought & died for.
I started to read the article. Then I thought "may be he is working with cryptography and that is why he is searched". And a sentence or two later he writes "Advanced Mathematics" and then "GPS". I think that is why he is being searched.
Similarly the developer of curl was not able to obtain USA visa.
Why believe of what they say - what they say - that it is random - when turns out you on watchlist?
Might be because a person you have associated with in the past. I use the word " associated" very loosely. You would not be aware of the associates history for example.
i read the article, and i really think the combination of stated specialties, with dual-citizenship, sides up to a profile of concern.
-- thats not to say there should be concern. there are stereptypical profiles that ask the question, what is this person capable of doing? rather than, what does this person intend to do?
and thats the problem, its difficult to titrate intent, but capability is easy to asess
but if it's based on capability solely than each of us can be reasonably suspected of prostitution, to provide an illustrative if somewhat crude example
yes exactly, but do you fit the profile of a prostitute? or the profile of a booze cruise tourist?
Because you're a dual citizen.
That alone cannot be it:
"According to the ABF website, the MAL is for non-citizens. According to a 2013 audit, there were only 172 Australian citizens on the list at that time. What accords me this rare honour, I do not know."
There are far more than 172 Australian dual nationals.
He's referring to the number of people(with dual australian/whichever citizenship) being on the 'Movement Alert List', meaning being on the shitlist of the ABF.
I understood that's what Handmer means. I pointed out he can't be on the list simply "Because [he's] a dual citizen", as almost no dual citizens are on the list.
The author does not state how he knows he is on the MAL. It’s an important part of the story. If he doesn’t actually know, it’s more than possible it is random.
"I engaged Marque Lawyers to formalize the documentation trail and establish a formal record of governmental non-responsiveness. ... FOIA process ... What did we discover in the documents that were finally released? I am on the Movement Alert List and according to this documentation, none of the searches discovered anything of interest to the ABF."
I read the whole thing and missed that. Thank you for the correction.