<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8"></head><body>I respectfully disagree. Security resources are scarce and detection is stochastic, so the duty of homeland security is to prioritise sources and signals according to relevance and significance. This jumping at shadows (or tough-guy posturing) is, in my view, a waste of resources that brings the security strategy into disrepute. It is therefore a dereliction of duty, to borrow your phrase. TIA is an urban myth, and a counterproductive one at that. IMHO, of course:-)<div><br><br><br><br><span style="font-size:100%">Sent from Samsung tablet</span> </div><br><br><br>Pranesh Prakash <pranesh@cis-india.org> wrote:<br><br><br>Kerry Brown [2012-01-31 22:23]:<br>> Why are the monitoring tweets in the first place?<br><br>Because most people would, and very rightly so, accuse them of laxity<br>and dereliction of duty if they didn't.<br><br>I have not seen a single cogent argument as to why they should not. If<br>it is the duty of the immigration officers to prevent untoward<br>foreigners from entering the country, then they should use all public<br>information at their disposal, at the very least, to come to that<br>conclusion.<br><br>It is another matter whether Twitter banter should form the basis of<br>their opinions, but then you don't seem to be interested in that question.<br><br>-- <br>Pranesh Prakash<br>Programme Manager<br>Centre for Internet and Society<br>W: http://cis-india.org | T: +91 80 40926283<br><br> </body>