"Total Information Awareness" - Poindexter's baby is still alive

[welshTerrier2]

you may or may not remember John Poindexter's "Total Information Awareness" (TIA) program ... it was so invasive the Senate shut off funding for it back in 2003(?) ... Poindexter was convicted of lying to Congress in the Iran-Contra scandal; that's a felony you know ... who better to design a program to spy on each and every American than a convicted felon who lies to Congress???

well, the NSA's "let's spy on all Americans" program appears to be the tip of the iceberg ... all indications are that spying on Americans, all Americans, has been expanded by this corrupt administration to truly give wings to the phrase "big brother is watching you" ...

all indications are that the TIA program was moved inside the Pentagon (they must have had a few extra dollars lying around) after Congress cut-off funding for TIA ... so much for effective Congressional oversight ... the spying seems to be everywhere ... one disturbing aspect of these spying programs is how closely they seem to be integrated with commercial databases, for example, a database maintained by Wal-Mart on American citizens ... for those interested in pursuing the lead, Wes Clark, and please note that i make no comment on this report, appears to have met at least a few times with John Poindexter in Clark's capacity as a lobbyist for commercial data company Acxiom which collected massive amounts of personal information on US citizens ... has Clark ever commented on these meetings?

and finally, just a few random thoughts on the scope and implications of this spying program ... bush, of course, will hide behind the "fear of terrorism" justification ... Democrats, and perhaps more importantly, Congressional republicans, must distinguish between showing some tolerance for broader investigatory powers for the executive branch if circumstances dictate BUT this in NO WAY can justify bush's overt breaking of the law ... this is a felony and it is absolutely indictable ... the point is that his "terrorism" excuse does NOT JUSTIFY what he did and it is up to Congress to protect the American people from the abuses of this president ...

30 years ago we celebrated the country's 200 birthday ... there was a ton of focus at the time on the ideals on which the country was founded ... ask your republican friends if they are really willing to throw all that away because of 9/11? bush lied; bush spied ... it's time for him to go ... the most effective political campaign won't be "pro Democrat" or anti-republican; the most effective theme for Democrats will be "pro American" ... i think the Party will find that the Founding Fathers will make very effective campaign workers ... Americans are really tired of the partisan sniping; the path to victory lies in safeguarding our Constitutional freedoms and honoring the system of checks and balances between the branches of government ...

finally, it's important to understand the motivations for this spying on Americans ... does anyone actually believe information would only be used for "legitimate" purposes? the objective of the program is both political and commercial ... they are "data mining" the soul of America and the soul of Americans ... hell, it's more than just data mining; it's strip mining ... the burden to prove that the data was not used illicitly for political or commercial gain should pass to those in control ... this spying broke the law; period !! we've been pretty energized for a long time around here about the corruption of voting machines; spying on political foes is every bit as dangerous ... this cannot be allowed to stand ...

source: http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artman/publish/printer_7904.shtml

Spying on Americans by the super-secret National Security Agency is not only more widespread than President George W. Bush admits but is part of a concentrated, government-wide effort to gather and catalog information on U.S. citizens, sources close to the administration say.

Besides the NSA, the Pentagon, Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Department of Homeland Security and dozens of private contractors are spying on millions of Americans 24 hours a day, seven days a week, 365 days a year.

"It’s a total effort to build dossiers on as many Americans as possible," says a former NSA agent who quit in disgust over use of the agency to spy on Americans. "We're no longer in the business of tracking our enemies. We're spying on everyday Americans."

"It's really obvious to me that it's a look-at-everything type program," says cryptology expert Bruce Schneier. <skip>

The system, set up by retired admiral John Poindexter, once convicted of lying to Congress in the Iran-Contra scandal, compiles financial, travel and other data on the day-to-day activities of Americans and then runs that data through a computer model to look for patterns that the agency deems “terrorist-related behavior.”

Poindexter admits the program was quietly moved into the Pentagon’s “black bag” program where it does escapes Congressional oversight.

“TIA builds a profile of every American who travels, has a bank account, uses credit cards and has a credit record,” says security expert Allen Banks. “The profile establishes norms based on the person’s spending and travel habits. Then the system looks for patterns that break from the norms, such of purchases of materials that are considered likely for terrorist activity, travel to specific areas or a change in spending habits.”

Patterns that fit pre-defined criteria result in an investigative alert and the individual becomes a “person of interest” who is referred to the Department of Justice and Department of Homeland Security, Banks says. <skip>

the following web site has amassed a great collection of links that show the scope of bush's spying on American's ... ignorance is our greatest enemy in this battle ... it's important to educate your neighbors about the dangers this spying program poses ... we cannot just let this pass as yet another excess of the radical right ... those who say "why should i care if they spy on me; i didn't do anything wrong" need to be set straight ... now get out there and start teaching people ... here's a great starting point:

source: http://www.epic.org/privacy/profiling/tia/

In November 2002, the New York Times reported that the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) was developing a tracking system called "Total Information Awareness" (TIA), which was intended to detect terrorists through analyzing troves of information. The system, developed under the direction of John Poindexter, then-director of DARPA's Information Awareness Office, was envisioned to give law enforcement access to private data without suspicion of wrongdoing or a warrant.

TIA purported to capture the "information signature" of people so that the government could track potential terrorists and criminals involved in "low-intensity/low-density" forms of warfare and crime. The goal was to track individuals through collecting as much information about them as possible and using computer algorithms and human analysis to detect potential activity.

The project called for the development of "revolutionary technology for ultra-large all-source information repositories," which would contain information from multiple sources to create a "virtual, centralized, grand database." This database would be populated by transaction data contained in current databases such as financial records, medical records, communication records, and travel records as well as new sources of information. Also fed into the database would be intelligence data.

A key component of the TIA project was to develop data-mining or knowledge discovery tools that would sort through the massive amounts of information to find patterns and associations. TIA would also develop search tools such as Project Genoa, which Admiral Poindexter's former employer Syntek Technologies assisted in developing. TIA aimed to fund the development of more such tools and data-mining technology to help analysts understand and even "preempt" future action.

A further crucial component was the development of biometric technology to enable the identification and tracking of individuals. DARPA had already funded its "Human ID at a Distance" program, which aimed to positively identify people from a distance through technologies such as face recognition or gait recognition. A nationwide identification system would have been of great assistance to such a project by providing an easy means to track individuals across multiple information sources. <skip>

[serryjw]

1. Bush lied; Bush spied.....Bush must be tried!

Great bumpersticker!
BTW I have always believed that we must WIN on principal not by being anti Bushit or throwing MORE stones. When Bushit's numbers fell, ours are not going up that much. We must give Americans a reason to vote FOR US or they will just stay home....again!

[welshTerrier2]

2. nice one !!

and your understanding of the politics is right on target ... bush bashing is fine ... even partisanship is too be expected ...

but no electoral salespitch is needed when you're preaching fundamental American values ... that should sit at the core of any campaign ...

and let me drop a hint that those of the "way out there", extreme radical left would support an agenda that fights for fundamental liberties ... some of this ties directly to corporate spying and corporate lobbying ...

safeguarding democracy is an issue that cuts all the way across the political spectrum ... it just needs to be presented the right way and hammered and hammered and hammered ...

[serryjw]

3. I think you ,me and Ted may be in the minority

On the bus tonight i sat next to a nice hispanic man in his late 60's. Can't figure out his politics. he thought JFK was great, liked Clinton and did some good things besides his personal problems, "They sure GAVE Bush a tough one in Iraq??", ...and the best one was ....." Wiretapping is ok if it helps Bush find the terrorists.
So much for core principals? ( But I still do believe you are right)

[welshTerrier2]

4. my response to "if it helps catch the terrorists"

i tell them that some spying MIGHT be necessary but that it's critically important for one branch to be able to check on the other branch to ensure that this very special exception to the Constitution is not abused ...

if we let any president come along and start violating the Constitution, they might start controlling the press and the news and information we have access to ... a corrupt administration could do a huge amount of damage if Americans didn't have access to learning the truth ... in fact a corrupt administration could use spying, like Nixon tried to do during Watergate, to illegally obtain information on their political enemies ... that's not the way a fair political process should happen in this country ...

my point here is that we don't have to achieve the higher burden of proof that bush restricted freedom of the press or that he spied on Democrats; we only have to show that the Constitution requires the involvement of Congress and the Courts when "special" privileges are being sought ... bush had the FISA Court and he had the Congress who pulled the funding for the TIA program ... what he's been doing went too far and it was done in spite of the findings of the other two branches ... the argument is NOT that he necessarily used the spying for illicit purposes; the point is that he may have and should have allowed the other parts of the government to provide reasonable oversight ...

part of our mission has to be education ... many Americans may have learned about "checks and balances" way back in grade school; it's time they learned a little about their country and the importance of safeguarding their democracy against tyranny ...

[serryjw]

6. I agree but it's tough to have a civil lesson

on a short bus ride.

[welshTerrier2]

7. you've put your finger on the "big picture"

what you wrote is exactly right ... and it's not only because it's a short ride; it's also because you would be introducing a radically new idea ...

ride the busses and trains day and night and let me know how many conversations you hear about safeguarding democracy, the fourth Amendment, or the system of checks and balances among the branches of government that is written into the Constitution ...

it's not just a citizen-to-citizen problem ... the same exact problem confronts all of our political candidates regardless of what themes and platforms are being pushed ... each and everyone of us, our candidates included, have to begin our little speeches at square one because the groundwork has not been laid ...

the Party needs to develop things like a "pro democracy" campaign and make it part of everyone's daily script ... we lack message consistency and it's killing us ... your bus buddy would have been a much easier mark if he had heard the message a few hundred times ...

[serryjw]

8. Slam Dunk!

WT....When people say to me '9-11 changed everything" or "Bushit is doing his best after 9-11" How do you say anything like MIHOP! UNTIL they understand what happened on 9-11 was not some Arab boogyman but our government nothing else makes sense. We all sound like CT's.I bought the encyclopedia and they bought some Bushit propaganda Cliff Notes....Where do you start? Civil 101? The insugence in iraq are fighting for something THEY belive in..even if we don't agree. Would americans fight for the Constitution's survival? I think NOT!


Look at our country by demographics
OVER 70...Scared. They KNOW what fascism is first hand. They are seeing their pension, SS & Medicare going down the toilet.

Baby Boomers. The 'SANDWICH GENERATION' Have kids in collge ( tuition going up), have elderly parents (that they would prefer not eat cat food..at least not friskies!), losing their jobs to outsourcing/downsizing, starting to get middle age health problems, medical & Pharma bills


The 20 somethings can't find jobs that they were educated to do and have HUGE college loans

The country either doesn't have the time to understand or is sooooooo stressed/scared they don't want to know.
Remember, MOST of our citizens did NOT live through the depression. They have only known good times. How do you expect the to catch up NOW?

[welshTerrier2]

9. "How do you expect them to catch up NOW?"

there's no way most can be brought up to speed anytime soon ... but, and don't believe what you've heard because i made up this expression all by myself, "the journey of a thousand miles begins with one step" ... really, i made it up ... you can trust me on this ...

i see "political education" as a continuum ... if we give one person one piece of information, perhaps we will see no visible changes ... but as the information flows, and sinks in, a few more become converted ... and then a few more and a few more ...

but Democrats don't seem to lay the groundwork the way they need to ... there is something so fundamentally wrong in this country that "getting back to basics", i.e. teaching Civics 101, has to be job one for every single Democrat ... here's our position on social security and here's our position on education are just not enough ... there's an immediate opposition with most issue positions ... on social security, for example, you're immediately confronted with the "there's no way to pay for it" argument or the "baby boom generation is too large to support" ... sure we have responses; but already you're into a political argument with someone who doesn't agree with you ... same with education ... you hear "teachers shouldn't get tenure" or "you can't just throw money at the problem" ...

the catch with preaching democracy is that, even though most Americans are incredibly uninformed, they have an underlying respect for our American institutions ... the danger lies not in their opposition to Constitutional freedoms but in their ignorance of them ...

RFK Jr. has it right when he says that 80% of republicans would be Democrats if they had the facts ... we've not been doing a good job educating the electorate ... it's a huge job that will take a generation ... we're running out of time and still the Party is not hearing the message ... so i write my little posts and go to my little meetings ... and most smile and say how nice it is that i believe in democracy ... arrrrrrrggghhhhhhh ...

[serryjw]

10. RFK was correct

and that is why it was so easy to win election for decades, What happened? We just stopped doing it and the older generation stopped telling their kids WHY they love the democratic party and what it stands for.....because in recent decades we have NOT stood for all we did before. We can have our little sound byte converations then the damn democrats go and do a stupid thing that is all over the media.....like voting for a damn war, supporting P1 & P2, the bankrupcy bill..shall I continue??

[welshTerrier2]

11. you're killing me here ...

:banghead:

but that's only because you're preaching to the choir on the issues you listed ...

i spend huge amounts of time and effort on DU especially focussed on the war ... i've probably made thousands of posts on the subject ... and stepping out of my views on the issue from a policy perspective in keeping with this thread, i'll only say that the Democrats have fumbled the ball politically on Iraq ...

next year's elections have to be "nationalized" if the Democrats are to make substantial gains ... perhaps the spying and corruption issue will have legs and let the Party go national ... the war sure could have done the same but the Democrats have just not gotten any traction with the American people on the issue ... my motto has been that the best policies make the best politics; when it comes to Iraq, neither Party has been effective on either ...

[serryjw]

13. Diane Degette my congresswoman

one of the most liberal, with a great voting record. She would not continue to be re-elected in a 95% liberal district if she didn't vote the right way. She gets a weekly emails from me complimenting her on her vote or berating her when she did the wrong thing. She voted to affirm Bushit's elction in 2004. Did she hear from me!
We had a meeting with her before the invasion thru Move On, but she was called back to DC for a vote. We met with her assistant. No body but me heard him say under his breathe, after we gave our plea for no invasion......" But WE NEED THE OIL!"
My letter to Oprah...She never did anything with in!
quote.......
My Dear Oprah,
Congrads on a great show 9/29 on “Get out and Vote”! I have been a political activist in the trenches for over 3 years trying to get people to understand that we are at a cross roads in out countries history and encouraging them to make their voice heard. I have raised $250,000 for the Dems; have spoken to literally thousands, sent emails to hundreds and registered hundreds to vote. I’m on a first name basis with my Representative. I thank her when she votes correctly and berate her when she doesn’t

I am very concerned on how uninformed America is. What hope does Democracy have it millions believe Rush and Sean are REALLY telling you NEWS!

Oprah, You changed the publishing world forever with your Oprah Book Club. Now I am asking you to do the same for Democracy. IF we only talk about this every 4 years America will not survive. We vote for Congress every 2-year. I would be surprised if 10% of your audience KNEW whom their Representative or Senator was. I would be even MORE surprised if they KNEW they can track THEIR elected officials voting record on the Internet. If we don’t hold them accountable for what they do and don’t do; we get the mess we are in right now.
I live in Colorado. I registered dozens of Felons whom are OFF parole. They thought they lost their voting privileges forever!
You have very talented people working for you. I am sure you can come up with a fun way to ‘educate’ our citizens on civics 101 that they should have studied in school.
American will not vote IF they don’t know how it directly affects them. They may register but will find every reason to not go to the polls.
Your demographics are mostly woman. Mothers are concerned about issues that affect their family’s health, the education of their children and how environmental protections are being eroded to benefit big business. The next generation will not have even half the benefits we did it this continues. Oprah, please do something. Your country is counting on you!

Sincerely,
Serry J W
end quote.....

[welshTerrier2]

14. WOW!! that's beautiful serryjw ...

what a great letter ... did you hear back from her? i hate to say this but i barely know who Oprah is ... i've seen her on TV once or twice and i know how famous she is ... i just know too much about famous media types ... anyway, i'd be interested to know if you heard back from her or whether she took you up on your idea for adding Civics Lessons to her TV show ...

and as for the "we need the oil" comment, yikes ... i've written many times on DU that we are an imperialist nation and that it is not OK with me ... but i went further than that ... i said that if we are going to send our military all over the world to procure and protect oil supplies, at least we should be truthful about it and put the issue before the American people ...

it is NOT OK to peddle all the lies about terrorism and democracy and saving people from tyrants when it really is ALL ABOUT THE OIL and money and power ... if the American people are going to condone this greed and exploitation, so be it ... but let's not wrap ourselves in the cloak of democracy and preach how holy we are ...

the scary thing is, and this goes back to education and values, i'm not really all that confident that Americans would reject the country's imperialistic motives and actions if they had a real chance to vote on them ... again, i wish the Democrats would start doing some education on why imperialism is clearly just plain wrong ... they don't of course ... it leads many on the left to see them as complicit in the policy ...

let's hope that's not the case ...

[serryjw]

15. No I never heard from her

Reaching 20 million daily it was worth a chance.
As for imperialism, I think you would be disappointed. Is this a Zogby poll question?" Do you think we should invade countries and steal their oil" You would probably get a no! BUT if you asked " Do you think America should spread Democracy & Freedom around the world and share in the natural resources of that country that we freed. You’d get a Yes! Leave it to KKKark Rove to word it the right way.

I am doing a local petition in a city of Lakewood. An out-of-state developer wants to build 65 half million dollar condo's in a flood plane, open space, natural corridor for our wildlife. The residents are very much against it. A lady today whom was against the development would not sign my petition because I am a paid solicitor. Now mind you I live in an apt in Denver, she owns a home in Lakewood when these condo’s fall down the mountain in 10 years because the soil is too soft to build on the city of Lakewood will get sued by the homeowners for approving it and HER taxes will go up! ...But she wouldn't sign it because I would make a WHOLE dollar on her signature....... People are crazy!
http://www.ext.colostate.edu/pubs/garden/07236.html

[welshTerrier2]

16. my niece worked for the Pike's Peak Foundation

she graduated a couple of years ago from Colorado College (lived in Colorado Springs) and now she's going to school for Environmental Studies in Vermont ... about a month ago she was visiting and i got a chance to read a paper she was working on about land use issues ... sounds like the condo battle you're fighting would be right up her alley ... she thinks she might move to Denver next fall after she finishes her master's degree ...

i've got to shut down for the night and get my mandatory five hours of sleep ... thanks so much for the chat, serryjw ... you have a really excellent feel for what needs to happen ... i'll be keeping an eye out for your posts from now on ... maybe somewhere out there in DU-land others will pick up on this thread ...

talk to you soon ... have a great New Years ...

- wt2

[serryjw]

17. May the New Year bring us a little peace!

Namaste,
Serry

[FogerRox]

5. graet freekin post-- to combine CHB & Epic

let me throw in the -

http://www.waynemadsenreport.com/

December 28, 2005 -- BREAKING NEWS. NSA spied on its own employees, other U.S. intelligence personnel, and their journalist and congressional contacts. WMR has learned that the National Security Agency (NSA), on the orders of the Bush administration, eavesdropped on the private conversations and e-mail of its own employees, employees of other U.S. intelligence agencies -- including the CIA and DIA -- and their contacts in the media, Congress, and oversight agencies and offices.

The journalist surveillance program, code named "Firstfruits," was part of a Director of Central Intelligence (DCI) program that was maintained at least until October 2004 and was authorized by then-DCI Porter Goss. Firstfruits was authorized as part of a DCI "Countering Denial and Deception" program responsible to an entity known as the Foreign Denial and Deception Committee (FDDC). Since the intelligence community's reorganization, the DCI has been replaced by the Director of National Intelligence headed by John Negroponte and his deputy, former NSA director Gen. Michael Hayden.

Firstfruits was a database that contained both the articles and the transcripts of telephone and other communications of particular Washington journalists known to report on sensitive U.S. intelligence activities, particularly those involving NSA. According to NSA sources, the targeted journalists included author James Bamford, the New York Times' James Risen, the Washington Post's Vernon Loeb, the New Yorker's Seymour Hersh, the Washington Times' Bill Gertz, UPI's John C. K. Daly, and this editor , who has written about NSA for The Village Voice, CAQ, Intelligence Online, and the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC).

Wayne on the NSA:

NSA: Listening in on its own employees, journalists, and members of Congress.

In addition, beginning in 2001 but before the 9-11 attacks, NSA began to target anyone in the U.S. intelligence community who was deemed a "disgruntled employee." According to NSA sources, this surveillance was a violation of United States Signals Intelligence Directive (USSID) 18 and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978. The surveillance of U.S. intelligence personnel by other intelligence personnel in the United States and abroad was conducted without any warrants from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. The targeted U.S. intelligence agency personnel included those who made contact with members of the media, including the journalists targeted by Firstfruits, as well as members of Congress, Inspectors General, and other oversight agencies. Those discovered to have spoken to journalists and oversight personnel were subjected to sudden clearance revocation and termination as "security risks."

In 2001, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court rejected a number of FISA wiretap applications from Michael Resnick, the FBI supervisor in charge of counter-terrorism surveillance. The court said that some 75 warrant requests from the FBI were erroneous and that the FBI, under Louis Freeh and Robert Mueller, had misled the court and misused the FISA law on dozens of occasions. In a May 17, 2002 opinion, the presiding FISA Judge, Royce C. Lamberth (a Texan appointed by Ronald Reagan), barred Resnick from ever appearing before the court again. The ruling, released by Lamberth's successor, Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelley, stated in extremely strong terms, "In virtually every instance, the government's misstatements and omissions in FISA applications and violations of the Court's orders involved information sharing and unauthorized disseminations to criminal investigators and prosecutors . . . How these misrepresentations occurred remains unexplained to the court."

After the Justice Department appealed the FISC decision, the FISA Review court met for the first time in its history. The three-member review court, composed of Ralph Guy of the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, Edward Leavy of the 9th Circuit, and Laurence Silberman of the D.C. Circuit, overturned the FISC decision on the Bush administration's wiretap requests.

Based on recent disclosures that the Bush administration has been using the NSA to conduct illegal surveillance of U.S. citizens, it is now becoming apparent what vexed the FISC to the point that it rejected, in an unprecedented manner, numerous wiretap requests and sanctioned Resnick.

Kicked and recommended I suggest ya all do the same

[Demi_Babe]

12. nominated

we need just one more vote to get this thread SEEN!

[undergroundpanther]

18. I made this anti Tips graphic

before I got good as I am now at photoshop.They had a program they were pushing a citizen spy corps called C.A.T eyes.This is why I have a cat logo.
http://www.underreported.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=index&catid=&topic=5&allstories=1
http://www.etext.org/Politics/MIM/agitation/civlib/TIPS.html

My counter logo,
]

[undergroundpanther]

19. Trying it again

Thiers





Mine

[warbly]

20. everyone should download this logo

and repost it throughout the land.
it is creepy as hell, and gives a lot of insight into Poindexter and his crowd, just by the image they chose.
another summary of the public history of TIA is here.

[radio4progressives]

21. Yes I remember this... creepy bastards K/R

:thumbsup:
:nuke::grr::mad::grr::nuke:

[warbly]

22. Where the Hell are the Dems?

the bushies are controlling the narrative on this, right out of the gate!
I know it's the Holiday, but they are working overtime. All the news accounts today were full of spin on the domestic spy issue, and it was 100% grade A certified Bushie spin, unchallenged.

Reid/Pelosi need to be issuing statements, dontcha think?

[bigbrother05]

23. Poindexter, that vile creature

Pointed this out and started a thread a day or so after Chimpy admitted the monitoring. Also saw another post of a Molly Ivins column pointing to TIA. Wiretapping doesn't begin to describe this invasion. The Pukes like that phrase because it sounds so limited and specific. What he's doing (with or without TIA) is turning a wholesale snooper system loose on US citizens. They monitor everything then sift through it to find what they are looking for. Without oversight by courts and laws, the only control is what the programmers/analysts/bosses tell it to look for. Remember the tales of folks getting visits from the SS after LTTEs and the folks story about the DoD wanting to shut down the families blog for deployed troops? How soon before lively political conversations on your cell, in your email, or via IM will bring the visits in the night? How long before that capability (a hidden cookie inserted in their site to report back to the watchers) will be turned on planned parenthood or environmental groups?

These bastards must be stopped!

[dogman]

24. Here is a Clark supporters blog entry from the campaign when this

issue first arose. It pretty well covers the story as it pertains to Clark.
Snip>One of today's projectiles concerns Clark's work lobbying on behalf of an Arkansas corporation called Acxiom, which maintains a database of legally obtained information that it provides to telemarketers or research groups. Acxiom won a contract from the Pentagon to assist in building a passenger database called CAPPS II that airlines would use to screen for potential terrorists. According to an Acxiom executive and government officials who attended the meetings, Clark was vigilant about insisting that privacy rights be balanced with security needs.<snip
http://blogs.salon.com/0002556/2003/09/28.html
Clark discovered that commercially available data could pinpoint terrorists. He was clear to point out that protections must be in place for individuals rights to privacy. This is obviously something Bushco had no concerns about.

[welshTerrier2]

25. a couple of points

first, thanks so much for addressing this issue ... i want to be clear that i don't fully understand Clark's role with Acxiom and exactly what data they collected and made money on by selling it to the US government ... but i do think it's important for us to understand the exact role played by anyone, Democrats included, when it comes to spying on American "persons" ...

i read the blog post at the link you provided ... i still hope someone can provide a source that includes more details directly from Clark ... frankly, i thought the blogger's defense could have been stronger ...

the point left hanging is whether it's acceptable to sell legally obtained information on American citizens to the US government ... or, perhaps a better way to phrase it is whether the government should have a right to buy private, commercially obtained information on US "persons" ... i say it is both immoral and illegal ... the fact, for example, that i might give some bank some of my personal financial information to obtain a loan or credit card does not mean i have relinquished my right to privacy and authorized the government to spy on my private financial activity (unless such investigation for potential criminality is authorized by a court) ...

so, and again, let me be very clear that i am making no allegations about Clark's activities, i think the question about whether it's appropriate to sell private, commercially obtained information constitutes either good judgment or good policy and also whether such activity should be legal ...

i would be very interested to hear Clark's statements about exactly what business he was conducting and exactly where he thinks the line should be drawn when it comes to the government investigating its own citizens ... the sale of commercial databases on US citizens to the government would, it seems to me, be an inappropriate activity ...

[Tom Rinaldo]

27. My earlier post shows that I share your general concern

I very much doubt that Acxiom was breaking completely new ground in negotiating with the Government for data services regarding attempts to screen for likely terrorists boarding airplanes. Our Justice Department is supposed to watchdog the legality and civil liberties angle and the courts are supposed to provide ultimate oversight. If we look closely at Federal programs meant to track dead beat dads over non payment of alimony payments, or to prevent Welfare fraud, I suspect there are private companies being contracted with there also, for some other examples. It's called privatization, remember?

Actually I am glad Clark was alert enough to recognize civil liberties issues in play at the time. When that occurred the nation really was much more literally on a war time footing. Domestic attacks had just occurred and no one honestly knew how many other shoes there might be left to drop. I remember being afraid to get on a plane. I travel for business, this wasn't an abstract issue for me. During literal times of verified significant domestic security threats there is legal precedent for civil liberties to be somewhat curtailed during an actual emergency. The right balance IS the right question to be asking, that and the legal basis for any restriction on our freedoms.

[Tom Rinaldo]

26. Data Mining is as American, or Un-American, as Google

Wired News

Beware the Google Threat

By Adam L. Penenberg Adam L. Penenberg | Also by this reporter
2005-06-24 15:23:00.0



..."On its way to wresting control of our desktops, Microsoft once asked, "Where do you want to go today?" Now Google provides the answer.

The problem is that Larry Page and Sergey Brin, the geeks who coded Google from the algorithm on up, are inserting themselves into our lives. They wish to accompany us everywhere, forever. They want us to see the world through Google-colored glasses.

They can do this because Google has a grip on the interface. When we boot up and get online we hardly notice that Google dispatches a cookie set to expire in 35 years. Then Google filters our reality, dictates our aesthetic, collates and catalogs our memories, chooses what information we mine. The Google experience becomes a collective Rorschach test, which shapes our worldview and affects who we are and what we will become."

<snip>

"Some view Google as a media company. It isn't, because it doesn't create its own content. Rather it repurposes and repackages pre-existing material. Google is really little more than a content syndicator, a broker that makes money through information arbitrage.

Once any of us Google an old classmate, scan the day's headlines at Google News, use Froogle to comparison shop, seek direction from Google Maps, review academic books and scholarly papers, we strike an implicit agreement.

In exchange for free access to Google's resources, Google gets to fire advertisements at us from every conceivable angle. Google even gets to read our e-mail so it can customize our ad viewing experience. The beneficiaries: Google, its advertisers and ad affiliates."
http://www.wired.com/news/culture/0,1284,67982,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_5


I have a customer who was on the board of a customer relationship managing softward company; E.piphany. Data harvesting is going on all of the time now everywhere. Someone here probably has the link to a great ACLU web ad about Ordering a Pizza. It's well worth a watch. We all know about the credit bureaus and the files they compile on everyone. The whole issue is chilling. Actually trying to prevent terrorists from blowing up or crashing air liners is one of the better uses for software of these types. Does anyone really believe there is a fire wall anymore between Government data bases and commercial data bases? The Feds can get any information they want on anyone that is available through public information given up anywhere and/or commercial transactions and/or legal filings. Acxiom is one of many private companies involved in data collection and use in every area of our lives now. What the Feds can't legally collect themselves they simply buy from private companies. That is before Bush's recent further authoritarian turn. Now he doesn't care what he can legally collect and sees no need for formal niceties about staying within the letter of the law.

The only level that private industry does not already legally operate inside of is out right surveillance and wiretapping, as contrasted with the types of data collection and sorts that Credit Bureaus, Amazon and Google engage in.

[welshTerrier2]

28. "a firewall between Government and commercial databases"

you asked whether anyone believes there is a firewall between commercials db's and government db's ... the answer is clearly "no" ...

but a more important question should be whether it's OK for the government to purchase information on private citizens ... i say that it is NOT ...

it doesn't matter to me that the commercial information on US citizens was legally obtained by some corporation ... the greater point is that if the US government seeks to buy information on "US persons", the government is breaking the law ... i should note that i would NOT extend this to aggregated information that provides no visibility to any individual ... for example, if the government could purchase information about how many miles the average citizen drives their car each year without identifying any individual citizen, i think that would be fine ...

so, i continue to ask whether anyone is familiar with exactly why General Clark was meeting with Poindexter and exactly what his views are on the propriety of selling commercial information about US persons (i.e. indiduals) to the Federal government ... i appreciate that Clark has raised concerns about the privacy rights of citizens but would like to know how he defines those right when it comes to the government purchasing commercial databases ...

[Tom Rinaldo]

29. We are cross posting so there is some overlap

I would need to go back and do more research to get much more specific with you on this. What I do remember is that Clark was not deeply involved. The government was looking for resources to tighten up airline passenger screening, which already was in place and had been ongoing for years, and Acxiom was an Arkansas firm with software tools that might be applicable.

Honestly the way the American political system is supposed to work is that private business should not be the ones required to legally second guess bona fide government initiatives. Those should be vetted by our Justice Department and reviewed by our Courts. It really was not Clark's responsibility to ensure that the U.S. government was only considering legal remedies to the threat of terrorists boarding planes, but in fact, Clark did show concern over whether the U.S. government intended to pursue only legal remedies.

[welshTerrier2]

30. OK, let's consolidate here ...

in your other post, you wrote:

During literal times of verified significant domestic security threats there is legal precedent for civil liberties to be somewhat curtailed during an actual emergency. The right balance IS the right question to be asking, that and the legal basis for any restriction on our freedoms.

i suspect we're on the same page here but wanted to emphasize the following point ... it is certainly reasonable to restrict civil liberties in critical, extraordinary, emergency situations if doing so is absolutely necessary to protect the well-being of the nation ... i have no issue with that as a standard should the situation warrant ... and i also have no issue with your statement that we have to find "the right balance" ...

HOWEVER, and this is where bush broke the law, the right balance is NOT only between civil liberties and national security; it's between the Executive branch and the other branches of government ... bush took the TIA program that was defunded by the Congress and moved it into the Pentagon ... he ignored the will of Congress and failed to keep them informed of his spying on US persons ... and he also failed to conform to the FISA regulations ... an especially interesting point, made in response to those who argue that FISA did not allow bush to respond quickly enough to national security issues, is that bush NEVER sought "after the fact" FISA clearance ... it's not legitimate to argue that the process of getting court approval is too slow when he never came back to the court "after the fact" to provide the necessary support and documentation for the spying he did on US persons ... the bottom line is bush flaunted the law, ignored the Congress and the courts, spied on US persons who had absolutely nothing to do with terrorism and therefore committed felonies ...

as for Clark, a few additional points ... first, in response to your statement that you don't remember Clark being that involved, perhaps you're correct; perhaps not ... here's a link (http://www.epic.org/privacy/profiling/tia/poindextersch.pdf - scroll down a little) to photos of Poindexter's desk calendar that shows scheduled meetings with Clark on two different dates during 2002 ... shortly after the meeting with Clark, Poindexter's schedule shows a meeting on a DARPA project briefing ... perhaps the two are unrelated ...

finally, i'm NOT too comfortable with the following standard for "commercial conduct":

Honestly the way the American political system is supposed to work is that private business should not be the ones required to legally second guess bona fide government initiatives. Those should be vetted by our Justice Department and reviewed by our Courts. It really was not Clark's responsibility to ensure that the U.S. government was only considering legal remedies to the threat of terrorists boarding planes ...

a few points on this ... first, Clark is just NOT any old business person conducting a little commerce with the government ... i think we should hold our most prominent political leaders to a somewhat higher standard ... as for "bona fide government initiatives", Poindexter was convicted of a felony for lying ... i think it's fair to question just how "bona fide" any operation he's involved in really is ...

but this statement: It really was not Clark's responsibility to ensure that the U.S. government was only considering legal remedies to the threat of terrorists boarding planes seems the most troubling to me ... i totally agree with your position that no business person should be held responsible to know in advance how the information would be used ... but we blur a very dangerous line when we conflate corporate enterprises with governance ... the impropriety, at least in my view, was NOT that the data was ultimately used to spy on ALL Americans, not just "terrorists"; the impropriety was that the government did NOT have a right to obtain confidential information on millions and millions of US citizens period !!

the "hardball" question for Clark, and perhaps he's addressed this, is whether he believes it is OK for the US government to purchase (or otherwise obtain) private information on American citizens on a wholesale basis ... if he believes the government has no right to do so, what exactly was his intent in selling such information to Poindexter et al?

[dogman]

31. A couple quick points.

Clark was on the Board of Directors of Axciom. He joined them after leaving the Army and before running for President. He was also a lobbyist for them and resigned in October after pressure from Edwards and Lieberman. Funny, I think because they were still legislators and dealing with lobbyists and on the public payroll. None the less Clark resigned to avoid any possible tainting of his candidacy. As a lobbyist I don't know if Clark actually sold anything, more likely he was seeking to secure a contract for Axciom to do the work. The government had actually put systems in place, Capps II was the most recent I believe. As far as personal privacy, there are laws that a financial institution is required to submit information to the gov't., such as transactions over $10,000. Also there may be a question of rights that you give up when you purchase a plane ticket, I've never read the small print, but I know that when you have a drivers license or drive a vehicle on public roads the courts have taken away all of our 4th amendment rights. As we become an info based society these problems will only become more prevalent and we know these thugs will abuse the process. I do know that Clark said he felt there should be safe guards but since he was not even a politician at the time I don't think he would have been involved in that process. I do know he said while campaigning that the Patriot Act needed rvisions to safeguard our rights. i don't believe he had any specific proposals however. He did not become a Candidate until Sept. 2003 and had quite a bit of policy and position papers to develop.

[Tom Rinaldo]

32. Several points

There is some mixing of apples and oranges going on here, without taking a position on the relative importance of apples or oranges. There is the matter of illegal surveillance, as in warrant-less wire tapping American citizens, and there is the issue of the wide scale collecting of, to varying degrees, public record information on U.S. citizens. Whether the specifics falling under the latter should always be considered public record, and whether that data should be retained rather than discarded etc. etc., are important issues, as is the matter of who has a right to collect and mine that data to begin with, but it nonetheless is a different issue from the warrant-less wire tapping that the Bush Administration has been exposed as doing. I see you slipping in and out of focusing on one or the other of these matters in your text, which is not to say that there isn't a logical thread that connects them, but they are not exactly one and the same either. Maybe they should be but current law does not treat them as identical.

I find confusing the two issues to be troubling when one is discussing a specific set of circumstances, such as real time reacting to the fact that terrorists had recently brought down three American Passenger jets and some of them were known terrorists who somehow were allowed to board those planes anyway. The immediate emergency was relevant, as in the fact that a pre existing but inadequate screening program already existed, supposedly legally. Here is the link to the piece I wrote on Bush's illegal phone interceptions by the way:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=2330342

Second, Clark was not a prominent political leader at the time in question. He really was purely a private citizen in business. His interest in politics came about later as a result of how badly Bush managed the long term aftermath of 9/11, in particular his rush to want to attack nation states in the middle east instead of targeting Al Quada. Clark's personal plans at that time were to concentrate on making enough money to establish a non profit foundation that he would then manage in semi-retirement (he wistfully talked about wanting to become a golf pro actually, after putting aside savings for financial security and launching a foundation). But again, unlike most in business, Clark DID have active concerns about the civil liberty implications of government data mining related to passenger screening, and he said so at the time. That is a key point. At that time it seemed like an ongoing domestic war with terrorists was a strong likelihood. I know that was one factor that played into my decision to sell my home to reduce my debt profile, that's how seriously I took that possibility. Roosevelt met with Stalin during World War II and Clark met with Poindexter following 9/11, who was then a government designated go to guy at the time. That didn't mean Roosevelt endorsed Stalin's philosophy of governing or that Clark endorsed Poindexter's. You may remember that Gore was proclaiming Bush to be his "Commander in Chief" at about this time also.

But the big question is NOT limited to Clark by ANY stretch of the imagination. Where has Congress been throughout all of this, the people who actually hold some power in our government, who review and pass budgets, who vote yay or nay on Bush's appointments, who can request hearings and testimony and reports, who can propose legislation to safeguard liberties, who have taxpayer funded expert staff at their disposal to do research? Unlike Senators and Congressmen Clark had none of those powers or privileges to call on or mobilize. Like I said in another post, the issue of data mining of U.S. citizens predates 9/11, when there was no hint of a domestic emergency that threatened the economy of our whole nation by potentially shutting down our air transportation system. Throw a wider net to your inquiry WT2, it demands it.

[welshTerrier2]

33. apples, oranges and wider nets ...

i draw no line between spying on Americans for illicit purposes whether done by wiretapping or done by purchasing or otherwise acquiring confidential information contained in commercial datastores ... i'm no lawyer ... perhaps there are critical legal differences between the two methods of obtaining data on American citizens ... from my point of view, privacy rights of US persons demand that the government mind its own damned business ... and the nature of the bush administration makes purchasing private databases even less palatable ... so i have no problem with your distinction between wiretapping and data acquisition and harvesting; to me, though, they're all part of the same fruit salad ... this administration spies on American persons and uses any and all information it can obtain for illicit purposes without any court or Congressional oversight ...

but yes, Clark was only intended to be a minor distraction from the main theme ... i buried my reference to his activities in a much more extensive post ... and as for wider nets, while my focus was mostly on bush and Poindexter, your comment about holding the failed republican Congress to account is dead on the money ... one of my recurring themes, of late, btw, is that it is undemocratic to bar the minority party from issuing subpoenas in the Congress ... this is especially true when one Party controls both the WH and the Congress ... when Democrats regain a majority, we really should try to change this rule ...

[Tom Rinaldo]

34. "Fruit salad", agreed. Morally comparable but probably legally different

On one front we have to defend the United States Constitution, on another front we probably need new legislation. And that last idea of yours is a very good one; "undemocratic to bar the minority party from issuing subpoenas in the Congress."

Happy New Year WT2 and everyone else reading this, I am pretty much signing off for 2005.

[welshTerrier2]

35. best wishes to you, Tom ...

you are truly one of DU's fine citizens ...