Check again, my FRiend. You are correct in fact, but wrong in assumption and conclusion. It was not the "communication system" that threw these innocent people in jail and forced these innocent people (of the allegations) on a plane out of this country.
It was assertive HUMAN and AUTHORITARIAN DECISION-MAKING APPROVAL THAT USED "communications system" information-gathering data. If you can't tell the difference, then you also help me make the point that I was trying to make with that gentlelady.
Right!
BUT . . . . . all they get from the computer is that a word on the watchlist came up in a conversation. They DON'T get the context, they DON'T get the entire conversation, NOR do they get an association with an idiotic TV program.
IOW, in their opinion (and I have to agree with it), it is better to err on the side of caution than to ignore something and potentially allow a disaster to occur. If they had to pull the entire conversation up, then cross-check it with all known instances of the term and try to determine whether an actual threat has been made, it could take hours or days.
If the threat is real, how many people can be murdered in those hours or days while they try to go through your scenario?? Think back to FEMA and the phoney outrage after Hurricane Katrina. WE attacked the Bush Administration for alledgedly not acting fast enough.
Now we have a situation in which the government acted quickly to secure what they believed was a potential threat and you're upset about THAT!!!
What will it take to make you happy?? They're bureaucrats, NOT mind readers!