This can happen to you also and it happens a lot.

There is a major company out there that companies use for background checks and they have confused me with someone who lived in the same town with the same name but 8 years prior to me living in that location. Thats all the matched between us was the name and town nothing else.

The only way I found out is my Agency drilled me asking me if I forgot to tell them something and only if I came clean and told the truth could they consider me for the position. Because we had the same name I came back as a potential felon. It took them several weeks to clear that we were not the same person. They had to get records from some underground facility that stores these records. When my name was finally cleared the project was fully under way without me. I got another position with the company but it cost me several weeks to get it straightened out. Made me wonder if this happened at other places that never took the time to check it out now I clarify this ahead of time with the company.

Sadly this isnt the first time. GMAC confused me with someone in a completely different state (5 states away) with a different middle initial, etc, and with one click marked me down as someone who filed for bankruptcy. GMAC had to clean up that mess. And it gets around fast I found out a few months later when buying a new refridgerator that Home Depot canceled my credit card upon that. But immediately I was approved for a new card.

Finally I was told by one company they already interviewed me when I was never interviewed. Someone with the same name in IT but different address applied at the same company. This was Lowes corporation. Lowes didn't check the address or checked and thought we were the same person. The agency had to clarify with them that I was not the person they interviewed.

Those are the times that I know of. Leaves you wondering if it had happened more.

Jason: I don't think I'd call an eight year old a terrorist. As awful as little children can be, to each other, they don't gqualify at that level. Or perhaps you think they could have a bomb planted on them, but that isn't their fault either.

There is however no lower age limit at all on being shot by a soldier, fuollowing which you will be posthumously declared an insurgent - and if not posthumous due to stopping one bullet, they'll probably make sure of you. There are fewer difficult questions to answer if there are fewer surviving witnesses.

Now being a pseudo democracy the US government its seems will not be happy untill each and every citezen is on that list. Total controle over its citezens is what the US government seems to be all about.

No one did, the only reliable info released from the FBI is/ was (historically) name based (though they obviously knew more) this is all being addressed with the new passports.

The info released to the airports has very little else that can be reliably worked with (how sex and approximate age never made it in not sure)

The key problem is there are loads of disjointed systems hence the US wanted it all in house but that has privacy issues, i.e. the EU rightly kicked off a bit then gave in a bit.

My personal solution was a cleared list ie passport number X is ok so in this case he'd generate a hit but he could be cleared (false positive) automatically without being hassled but extending that between individual organisations would be an issue government vs airline/airport vs common booking reservation system.

Its not Virgins its Grapes
They were the forbidden fruit (or at least damned hard to get hold of back then)
virgins were 2 a penny and pretty worthless anyway once used(still are. if youve seen subo;)

What idiot came up with a system based purely on name? Whoever did obviously doesn't get out much, and hasn't discovered that more than one person share the same name *shock*

There is no way I am ever going to fly to the US, my name is so common I was even at school with another me, so odds are one of them has been a twat and got on the list!

... if he lived in the middle east he very well could be a terrorist.

...no self respecting al-qaeda terrorist would have a name like Mikey Hicks!

That applies to the other one too!

That sounds about right, considering they cause rampant forest fires, damage ancient stone carvings, and even defecate in streams. Those terrors need to have their federal funding cut!

@Robert Carnegie - The unfail legislations have 'run their full course of absurdity' and people ARE starting to rise up. Except you.

@Someone Somewhere - that's 40 virgins. Your comment is more offensive than Robert's. Imagine, short-changing a kid of his virgins!

Does he get his 16 virgins anyway?

Get 'm while they're young, then they will probably complain less when they get old.

On the other hand, why not demand a significant donation for each search. The kid might have enough for university when/if he reaches that age.

that anyone who supports this terrorist suspect will also be put on the terror watch list and invasively searched. So I'm not going to stand up for him, Pastor Niemoller.

On the other hand, I believe that ridiculous or unfair impositions of "anti terror" legislation should not be resisted, they should be allowed to run their full course of absurdity until the whole population does rise up and speak out against this folly. I don't want one torture centre closed down or victimised prisoner released, I want that for ALL of them, and we won't get that by making an exception just because this child hadn't been born (I'm supposing) at the time of the World Trade Center and Pentagon attacks. Let's not have exceptions to the rule, the rule itself must be recognised as wrong and removed.