Slashdot Mirror
TSA Violated Privacy Act
pin_gween writes "Remember when the TSA said they wanted info on travelers last year? They said they were only using names to test new software. Apparently, they lied. The Guardian has an AP wire about a Congressional report on the TSA. From the article: 'The agency actually took 43,000 names of passengers and used about 200,000 variations of those names - who turned out to be real people who may not have flown that month, the GAO said. A TSA contractor collected 100 million records on those names.' They also 'published a second notice indicating that it would do the things it had earlier said it wouldn't do.' A TSA spokesman said the info will be destroyed when the test is over. My question -- will the test actually end?"
And all the whining Eurosocialists who cross her border everyday.
Microsoft: "You can trust our trusted computing platform"
SCO: "There is UNIX code in Linux"
Bush: "We will get the WMD out of Iraq"
etc etc.
Nobody really cares in the end, it's all so easy to forget being blatantly lied to as long as things are mostly OK in the end.
Right?
There is still a portion of the population that wants to force health care into the government.
is because there are people behind all of this. People are ultimately flawed, and can't be completely trusted without auditing processes
-- Who is the bigger fool? The fool or the fool who follows him? --
This is how companies handle privacy. They do something the majority of people will accept (taking names) and then they secretly change the scope of their project to get much more data. Then their defence is "If they gave us their name, we assumed they would be OK giving us this. We are a reputable company". I think they should be prosecuted for this, what if their system got hacked? That is a great deal of possible identity theft.
Voice your opinion!
We must always remember that a commitment from a company is not worth the electrons over which it is communicated.
2B || !2B
is because there are people behind all of this. People are ultimately flawed, and can't be completely trusted without auditing processes
Are you implying that they can be partially trusted?
You're not allowed to know that under the Patriot Act. In fact, even asking has identified you as a terrorist; the Department of Homeland Security has been notified.
Lacking <sarcasm> tags,
I'm starting a grass roots initiative right here, right now. Every passenger will be required to fly naked under the influence of ecstasy. As a result, we will have no hi-jackers, at least not the kind that commandeer aircraft.
The TSA was a bad idea, it costs much more than the previous group of morons did, and don't do a better job than the last group of morons.
Instead because its goverment we get Grandmothers, and children stripsearched, because profiling is bad.
I can't help but believe that the level of incompedance is intentional, setting the agency up to be dissolved (privatized) with a juicy contract to Haliburton
I used to have a cool sig, back when I cared
What if a huge neural network was fed all those names. If they destroy the data, the neural network still knows those names!
Am I right?
I honestly promise to never do it again.
-- Cheers!
That's what I thought.
I too have felt the cold finger of injustice.
It doesn't surprise me that the TSA has demonstrated contempt for the law here. As a regular traveler, I can tell you that they already (with some notable exceptions whose names I wish I had so I could cite them as positive examples) have contempt for the actual public they are charged with protecting. They have gone the way of all elites who profess to act in the name of the people, but actually do things that are in interally focused institutional interest.
I can certainly understand that law enforcement wants to "get the bad guys". Unfortunately, so much of today's law enforcement activity has little or nothing to do with actual criminals and spends most of its time operating against ordinary citizens. If you think this is limited to terrorism, think again. The Illinois State Police where I am routinely set up "seat belt enforcement zones" where people are pulled over and forced to prove that they aren't law breakers. It's similar to more and more "checkpoints" that are set up for all sorts of things and a presumption on the part of the police that they have the right to search you just to find out if you are doing anything wrong. That puts the 4th amendment on its head, and unfortunately our courts have gone along with it. Unless you are actually in your home, you can probably assume you can be investigated, searched, questeioned, etc. by the cops for any reason or for no reason at all.
So I don't see the TSA as some unique manifestation of anti-terror laws or a rogue agency. I see them as very symptomatic of what has been going on in law enforcement for a long time. This is just the next chapter.
No one else will protect your "freedom". Your liberty is your responsibility. Shorn of its Soviet enemy, America becomes its enemy. Tragedy of the Grotesque.
Don't you love it when people predict that shit like this will happen, and they're instantly met with tinfoil hat jokes?
If you have nothing to hide then we just have to dig a little deeper, don't we?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
What's that all about? Is it good, or is it whack?
HOW'S MY POSTING? CALL 1-800-POSTING
...they keep Ralph Nader and Cat Stevens from flying, I don't care what they do!
The TSA will, of course, lie whenever possible. Because they have no accountability. And lying gives them power. Not just "to take over the world", but to do a lousy job. To be lazy, incompetent, and still get paid.
Really, it's completely obvious that, except for the Qaeda and the Taliban, that slogan about "the post-9/11 world" everyone on TV chants, "everything changed", is total BS. Nothing changed, except the ability to scare people into submission went off the charts. People who wanted war in Iraq, no matter what, got their war. People who wanted giant defense budgets got them. People who wanted to discard habeas corpus protections got rid of them. People who wanted Republicans to control all the branches of government got them. People who wanted an excuse for a broken economy, to cover up offshoring, inadequate education, failed confidence from Enron, WorldCom, ArthurAndersen, and a generation of Wall Street snake oil salesmen, got their excuse. People who wanted tax shirking got it. People who wanted racial profiling and massive privacy invasion got it. People who wanted government handouts to their welfare states, at the cost of $trillions in debt, got all that. And all the oil profiteers got $60:barrel oil, which costs little more to extract and sell than when it was $25. And of course they got federal tax credits for buying SUVs that get <15MPG, rather than 50MPG alternative energy vehicles.
But only if you embraced terror: became a terrorist. People who didn't, like the Democrats, didn't get what they wanted. They didn't get their candidate in the White House, because they didn't get a big noise in the media about how the Qaeda specifically planned to avoid attacking the US. Freedom lovers haven't gotten the rest of the 1990s "peace dividend", like forcing China to stop its tyranny with the "market power of the US" - because the businesses which own the new Chinese industries, and their American markets, are profiting from the fear that distracts from the perpetual terrorism that keeps their Chinese slaves in line. And we didn't get Osama bin Laden. WHERE'S OSAMA? Where's that "democratic Iraq", the "quelled Iraqi threat to American security"? It's with those who failed to embrace terror: on the ash heap of history.
The lists of who got what, and who didn't, line up perfectly on who "embraces and extends" terrorism, and who doesn't. And it's not just "who's for and who's against". Because Democrats, the losers in the political duopoly, have been just as "against" terrorism in their laws and policies, as Republicans. Republicans, however, have cast Democrats as preferring "therapy" to "killing" for terrorists, though that's a vicious lie. But that way to scare Americans about Democrats is successful terrorism, using planebombs as fuel for political power. Really, there's little difference between the Qaeda and the Bush uses of terrorism. The planebombs and tube-bombs are attacks, they're sabotage of our essential infrastructure. But they're really just the necessary spark for the actual terrorism, the terror perpetuated in the media and among people. Just like the Taliban who conquered Afghanistan on the spark of repeling the Soviets with "Islam", the neocons are conquering America on the spark of repeling the "liberals" with Christian evangelism: the Christaliban who back Bush with faith. Regardless of what you believe about conspiracies among people in Washington to allow or encourage a "Pearl Harbor event" to justify their neocon agenda, it's undeniable that some have rode the wave of fear with skill and aplomb. So we're going to get nothing but more terrorism, with the minimum of actual bombs that destroy corporate property. We're going to get more fear, more lies, more abuse. Until we wake up and reject the terror, dispelled by knowledge, and eradicate the terrorists. Starting with those in Washington and the corporate media who are closest, and doing most of the damage. Cleansing the TSA of thse lying tyrants would be a good start.
--
make install -not war
My question is....can you actually believe them considering they have already lied uptil this point? How I would love to work in the government; lie right through your teeth to get what you want, if you get caught, admit that you lied, shrug and move on. No sweat.
Private security as more poorly performing or as more personally invasive? Sure, pre-9/11 private security at airports was a joke; but so was our government intelligence, for example.
Look at the world today. There are at least as many examples of public sector failures as private (our public schools being a great example). Many of the most polluted sites on our country were made that way by government agencies such as the US military. And of course let's not forget such shameful items as the Tuskegee Experiment.
The fact is, government is almost exactly like a large corporation in every respect - only on a larger scale. As I've often argued, government is the ultimate multi-national corporation. Both corporations and goverment are nominally controlled by their owners (the shareholders or voters) but the reality is that entrenched management really runs the show most of the time. Both are characterized by a bureaucratic mindset.
One big difference is that if a corporation does something wrong, it is much easier to hold accountable. You can sue a corporation who hurts you - governments can only be sued if they decided they want to let you (sovereign immunity). Governments have regulatory oversight of corporations, but there is little oversight of the government itself. Corporate officials who screw up can be sued personally for damaged (e.g., the Enron board). Public officials are immune from lawsuits related to their jobs by law. Also, corporations can rarely force you to do business with them (with some notable exceptions), but the government is generally your supplier of its services whether you want it or not.
Overall, I think we'd be better served with most serviced provided by a competitive private sector market, with vigorous public oversight to hold the providers accountable.
I'm not. Par for the course. If something is coming out of their mouths, it's a lie. I knew they were lying when they said it.
About midway through last year I started being searched every time I went through airport security. Every time. Every airport. What did I do to deserve this? I have no clue, except I tend to express somewhat liberal views on the internet.
:P
The same thing happened to an aquaintence at about the same time. I found out about it because we were both on a flight to Honduras with our local scuba club. That must have really sprung some alerts.
From the article A TSA contractor collected 100 million records on those names.
That is what worries me- How thoroughly are the contractors being vetted? If you visit the Federal Biz Opportunities site http://fbo.gov/ you will see that the gov't contacts out incredible amounts of work. I trust the US Military with my security (We could argue about the military and privacy all day so lets not bring that up), but why is our security being contacted out? That is what worries me. Where is the accountability???
And All I Ask is a Tall Ship And a Star to Steer Her By
What I'm getting at, the TSA will/has become a way to go out and find people who are guilty of crimes. Next, deadbeat dads, tax evaders, parking tickets, speeding tickets, etc ... - As others have said, "Good -bye 4th Amendment! We'll miss you!"
Evil people don't think they're evil. - George Lucas, Making of Ep III
This kind of thing is not surprising... Not the part about the TSA violating the law, but the part about them screwing up data, and not knowing when the test will end.
Have any of you who are flinging around "evil conspiracy" crap ever worked on large government software projects?
Those things go on forever, rescoping, changes, rewrok, bugs, idiot specifications that have to be met even though they dont make sense... the list goes on and on. Its usually because of some law or another that mandate the software have a given function in it (even if it makes no sense), and the management is far from sterling - and the bureacracy that sits astride it moves at a glacial pace, making it nearly impossible to get design changes approved in any kind of timely fashion - I'm talking months not weeks, for even minor changes.
Thats been my experience nearly every time when working as a government employee. And this was at a federal defence agency that actually is known for getting things done fairly well and relatively quickly. (and this also explains why I am no longer a government employee - you can only take so much before your head asplodes).
Remember when they formed that TSA, it was carved from people who were tossed out of other agencies (remember, government agencies fight like mad to keep the best from leaving) - usually that means those are people the other agencies wanted to get rid of -- making the TSA a potential dumping ground for incompetents, malcontents, and desk-sitter-do-nothings-deadwood.
So don't attribute to malice what is far, far more likely to be incompetence. Especially at a new agency.
Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo! http://goo.gl/J9bkO
Its some scarry stuff! eh?
Well said. If there was a "mandatory reading" on Slashdot, your quote would be part of it. Too bad moderation only goes to 5.
Huge personal info databases? We created the technology and wrote the code to make it possible. We gave the information when asked, because we didn't want the hassle that would occur when we said "no, that's none of your business."
We accepted the notion of Social Security and believed the government when they told us that SS#s would *never* be used for identification except by the SSA.
We elected officials based on the performance of the economy ... which encouraged them to stay out of the way of businesses as they tracked, junk-mailed, and spammed us.
We accepted the transition from cash to credit cards because we liked the convenience ... never blanching at the fact that we were leaving a paper trail for ourselves every month.
We accepted the notion that the First Amendment was all about the right to any kind of free speech whatsoever, even commercial junk mail by corporations, who are persons only as a legal convenience.
We were so scared of sexual predators in our schools that we willingly asked the government to take fingerprints of every school employee to match against their databases.
And above all, we clamored for greater security in our own country -- we accepted the 9/11 commission report -- because losing all of our rights seemed more palatable and *less likely* than our becoming the next Twin Towers victims.
Has government and business taken away our privacy? Yes -- but only because we wanted them to.
Human being (n.): A genetically human, genetically distinct, functioning organism.
Never of course. They are taking the google approach that everything is perpetually in beta testing.
I'm so sick and tired of all the stupid libertarians/liberals here always misunderestimating the President, whose only goal is to keep us all safe from harm.
Terrorists hate America because they hate our freedom, right? By taking away Americans' freedom, you effectively remove the terrorist threat. Take that Osama Hussein!
Waddaya gonna do? It's not like anybody going to vote these people out of office or anything. It has been reported that the majority wants the patriot act to be extended and strengthened. For those who want their freedoms back, it looks like they're in for a very long fight. Welcome to the new dark age. Ahhh...nature...aint she sweet?
What?
From the article A TSA contractor collected 100 million records on those names.
That is what worries me- How thoroughly are the contractors being vetted? If you visit the Federal Biz Opportunities site http://fbo.gov/ you will see that the gov't contacts out incredible amounts of work. I trust the US Military with my security (We could argue about the military and privacy all day so lets not bring that up), but why is our security being contacted out? That is what worries me. Where is the accountability???
They don't care. They don't have to. They're the US Government!
--
telnet://sinep.gotdns.com -- TW2002 and LORD registered!
bork bork bork!
Who are we at war with now?
"I believe today that my conduct is in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator"-Adolf Hitler or George W Bush?
This makes me wanna take a dump in someone's mouth.
Yeah, that's right. I went there.
This is why it is ALWAYS better to never LET the data fall into the hands of people who shouldn't have it. Of course, this was engineered by the same governmental infalliblity that gave us the WMD fantasy, so there wasn't much people could do to stop it. I'd suggest rolling some heads this coming election, but that requires a spine- I'm not sure American voters are up to the task.
He said the testing is designed to find out what kind of data airlines will need to get - such as passengers' birthdates - so they can turn it over to the government to check against watch lists.
I don't know whether to break out in hysterical laughter, or start sobbing uncontrollably. I can't think of a single reason that a few HUNDRED names (a thousand might be pushing it) wouldn't have provided this information. Or...maybe just thinking the process through for a minute. Now there's a novel idea.
With a secondary use as evidence of what a good citizen Microsoft is when it is taken to court.
Blar.
The cowardly majority of citizens who were no where near the blasts yet clammored the loudest for liberty-stealing 'safety measures'?
No, the fear-mongering media and the pussified general public caused this to happen.
I was bitching since the first plane hit that this would happen...you probabler were too.
Blar.
>but why is our security being contacted out? That is what worries me. Where is the accountability???
r iors/faqs/
this is exactly how some soldiers feel in iraq
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/war
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Apparently it's illegal to stand up and incite my fellow countrymen to standup against the government and throw off the repressive shackles of tyrrany.
The Privacy act Violates you!
Good job son, way to mod me down to giving my opinion. An opinion, I might add, shared by a a majority.
You got played. Accept it child, and live to grow another day.
Blar.
to this admin.
And this could almost certainly have been uttered in the white house for the last 5 years. What good fortune for governments that the people do not think.
Don't be harsh on this contractor, man... maybe they are just preparing for when the contract is up and they have something to fall back on, like competing with www.ZabaSearch.com. I think it's retarded that collecting info in this manner is illegal for the government but perfectly acceptable for everyone else in the world. My own attitude is that all the info collectors of the world should be hung by their balls.
Yes, this is OT but i really fail to understand you people. Try getting a life and doing something constructive for the country for a change.
Your guy lost the election, get over it already.. geesh.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Comment removed based on user account deletion
The next Justice of the Supreme Court believes that the President has the authority, without any due process, to imprison and torture anyone he declares an "enemy combatant".
John Roberts and Enemy Combatants
Don't let the red, white, and blue flags fool you. You are living in a totalitarian state. Get used to it.
BTW, many of us disliked kerry almost as much, because we are libertarians, not democrats. Your guy won due to cheating.
I only hope now, that there is good proof of GWB/cheney being involved with being a traitor (the outing of a CIA agent in the military IS aiding and comforting the enemy and subject to execution). and Yes, the CIC should fall under military rule on this one.
How do you find out if your name/info was used?
at what point does a person's illegal action get superseced by their legal ones? The money that BG has, was obtained illegally. Now he donates part of that to charity and regularly ties it to MS sales. So you have decided that a small amount of charity is good enough reason to accept him as ok. cool.
Sadaam, at one point, started giving money to world wide charities, but a number of them refused to take the money. By your criteria, Should he be forgiven his past transgressions and illegal gotten funds?
So what is the accepted cash flow to get a society (or a small group) to forgive past transgressions?
Of course, GWB recently accepted libia's re-engagement back in the free-world even with proven murder by them. I wonder what that took? did any money flow on that one?
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
A couple of things to keep in mind here:
Now, I'm not saying that what the TSA does with the data they muster is right or valid, but I am saying that you need to be a little more informed in your outrage.
If you think what the TSA is doing is unacceptable, see what is happening elsewhere. The US government requires airline companies worldwide to grant US agencies access to passenger database of the airlines, if an airline enters US air space (even if the airline has no destination in the US, that makes no difference, contrary to international treaties). The information exchanged is fairly extensive and does not end at what you eat (no kidding). Even if a person just flies within Europe, for example, all available personal data of the traveler have to be provided to US agencies. This allows the US agencies to produce detailed profiles of everybody. This may be useful to trace suspects. But knowing for whom certain persons work makes it possible to trace the activities of companies, too. An increased number of trips from company A to the HQ of B may indicate that A is bidding for a contract with B. Now, all these measures are imposed in the name of the fight against terrorism. You may think this is all right since the US government has to protect US citizens. Right you are. But did you know that we are dealing with bilateral agreements? The EU has the same access to US data, according to the treaty. Suddently you are in the spotlight! Do you want other governments to watch your life? Now how do think about this matter? Is it acceptable that there is zero discussion about this matter in the US media? The TSA experiments are just games.
Every time I read comments like "we did it to ourselves" and "the govenment is outsourcing my SSN!" I'm reminded that I'm reading Slashdot where _everyone_ likes to generalize to the point of self-induced paranoia. I don't trust the government or any corporatation... or anyone I don't know with my PII either.
The point is - that's why we have laws. Sarbanes-Oxley, HIPAA, GLBA and several others. Compliance is a major issue among many many US firms and some are taking proactive measures and fixing security, business processes and controls around PII. It's costing them millions of dollars. Corps are also legally held responsible for where they send your PII. They can't just outsource you SSN to Nigeria for "processing".
As a side note US is actually behind Europe on many privacy issues. As a general rule of thumb in US once you disclose your information to a corporation - they own it and choose how to use it. In Europe and some other countries around the world the corp doesn't own their customers' PII - the customers still do. Firms have to ask for permission to use your PII for something.
My question to you all is: Now that you know, what are you going to do?
Will you snipe from the sidelines, or will you take action? Will you communicate your true thoughts and feelings to your representatives, or will you find it adequate to post those thoughts and feelings here, preaching to the choir, but doing little more? (Those of you who are not US citizens, let not this fact stop you from contacting your own government officials--after all, can they not learn from example, or take warning from your (preemptive?) voice?)
Immediately after I post this, I intend to contact at least two of my representatives. It's the weekend, I have no envelopes (just now), and I know I might forget to write by the time I do, so I will be emailing them--but it is better than nothing, and it is action I can take now.
~UP
Eat the Path.
They also 'published a second notice indicating that it would do the things it had earlier said it wouldn't do.' A TSA spokesman said the info will be destroyed when the test is over.
And when the test is over, what stops them from publishing a third notice indicating that they won't destroy it after all?
If this sort of thing happened in the UK, the Information Commissioner's Office would be all over them.
I don't fly.
+++
My new Home
... almost as mad as the fact that Muslim terrorists use passenger jets to crash into tall buildings and kill thousands of people .
I do not like the TSA's deception/incompetence/whatever. But please put this story in perspective. Evil terrorists want to kill us. TSA was created to try to thwart them. If the TSA is erring on the side of caution, it's too bad they are making mistakes. But if those mistakes stop evil murderers from blowing things up with jets with my family on them, I'm not going to be too upset.
-Dan tdaxp
Most contractors for the government, especially for DHS or TSA, and mostly for the military, are required to get certain levels of security clearance. It's not easy to get clearance (last I heard, it cost at least $10,000 for a company to get clearance for a single employee) and most people who have clearance used to work for the military or the government. If you're lucky enough to get clearance as a civilian, it usually means you're a genius or you've been in the business long enough.
Most security clearance checks consist of polygraphs, credit and character background checks (guys in suits interview your friends and family) and checks to make sure you're not afiliated with some shady political or criminal organization.
Even as a contractor for the USPS I had to get drug tested and fingerprinted.
Patriot act and all the ensuing stuff is not about terrorism. If it was about terrorism, then the act would be granting NSA/CIA the ability to monitor americans and interfere with them. In stead, it gave the same capabilities to FBI and DOD that NSA/CIA had, but for use on US citizens.
But if those mistakes stop evil murderers from blowing things up with jets with my family on them, I'm not going to be too upset.
But what if they don't ? What if they just serve to increase government control over its citizens instead, while doing little about terrorism ?
Do you blindly trust a government that is, by and large, corporation- and church-controlled ? Actually - do you honestly believe that this is about terrorism ?
where, in the name of security, we will let the government do whatever it wants.
Most Christians tend to be conservative though, because we believe in the right to life. So when given a choice between a liberal and a conservative, it isn't very surprising that the conservative, who also happens to be Republican, is chosen by more Christians.
I'd bet if you took a poll or survey most of those who support the death penality call themselves Christian forgetting Christ supposedly said to turn the cheek and for those without sin to cast the first stone or some such. Didn't he also say to give Caesar his due?
FalconShould there be a Law?
No, people can be trusted. You just have to know whom to trust and eliminate everyone else. You trust your friends and are probably willing to stand up for them. You don't trust strangers until they become part of the group 'friends' and should thus be eliminating them, either incorporating them into the Group, or by killing them. It's as simple as that.
And, we should go onwards into the future, making battle, until the best Group wins:)
What I'm saying is that the superficial similarity between those incidents and the incidents that occur on a regular basis under the Taliban, with support of the mainstream religious community, is exactly that: superficial.
Hey guess who supported the Taliban and gave them millions of taxpayer dollars to them?...
The current occupier of the Whitehouse, President Bush. Even as they were blowing up historically and culturally significant monuments and executing people in a soccer stadium.
FalconShould there be a Law?
You may want to ask yourself which party is more imbued with the christian spirit and which only pays lip service.
I don't care which party talks about the "christian spirit" and which embodies it, what I care about is that none of them try to force their beliefs down my throat or to live the way they say to live. Live and let live.
FalconShould there be a Law?
Who cares? Please recall that the FBI went to the American Muslim Council (also known as the American chapter of the Osama bin Laden Fan Club) to vet those Muslim translator/contractors the military used. Not that I'm a present day fan of the "I'm killing those innocents in the name of national security" defense establishment.
There is no proof, at all, of the administration lying about anything.
If you want to debate the concept of potentially bad intellegence reports, thats fine. However there are no facts that support the case for 'lies'. Personally i dont think the reports were bad either, that things changed *after* the reports were made.. but at least that topic would be a valid discussion.
Sorry to dissapoint you.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Then let's just give it up and allow the dictatorship to take place. We'll all still live and be safer. After all, China, N. Korea and Cuba don't have any terrorism problems, and people live there and probably feel protected by their government, the way you want to feel. Why prolong the charade.
Just to put things in perspective, a lot more of us will be able to live if personal vehicles were outlawed, than if terrorism were extinct.
We can all use public transportation after all, it's a minor inconvenience for the safety of avoiding the very common car accidents. The kind of tradeoffs we've been doing.
I'm sadden that people can so easily lose track of the picture and get so riled up on terrorism (not to mention attacking this problem in an unsolvable way), when we have plenty of other "unexpected death" sources to deal with, of our own.
That's the peril of global politics ... if you give money for "humanitarian aid" to a country ruled by thugs, the money usually goes to the thugs. If you don't give money, you're accused of being a self-centered, greedy nation. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
Human being (n.): A genetically human, genetically distinct, functioning organism.
Think of how much screening they must have done to find a contractor who would do their bidding without raising a stink!
I trust the US Military with my security (We could argue about the military and privacy all day so lets not bring that up), but why is our security being contacted out? That is what worries me. Where is the accountability???
Because there's a big push to privatize our security and the military. An example is Blackwater USA. They got some big contracts in Iraq. These contractors got their gravy train and they're not about to give them up.
FalconShould there be a Law?
They don't care. They don't have to. They're the US Government!
Government is supposedly accountable so they contract work out then they can say they didn't do it.
FalconShould there be a Law?
How about this:
The Wave or The Wave
To explain to his students the atmosphere in the 1930's Nazi-Germany, history teacher Burt Ross initiates a daring experiment. He declares himself leader of a new movement, called 'The Wave'. Inspired, he proclaims ideas about Power, Discipline and Superiority. His students are strikingly willing to follow him. Soon the entire school is under the spell of 'The Wave'. Anyone who refuses to be a part of the Movement, faces threats or worse. Ross himself gets carried away by his own experiment. Or has it turned into something more than an experiment? A climax is unavoidable, resulting in a hard lesson for both Ross and his students...
FalconShould there be a Law?
- A number of admins employees have come forward and said that GWB was out to get Sadaam. And they said that he did not care if data was made up or not.
- GWB "fires" tenent for "incompetence". But then awards him the medal of freedom (as well as helps him find jobs later). Normally, the award goes to those that have done a great honor for America. What did Tenet do that GWB felt obliged?
- His admin has a gag order on sibel edmunds. It is claimed that she has proof of huge amounts of corruption of this admin (and apparently a number of congressmen).
- The Presidents chief of staff, and the vice-presidents chief of staff are implicated in outting a CIA agent. The fact that they did this together would indicate a conspiracy, that went up to a higher level.
I could go on, but why? The last one alone is enough evidence of lies. As it is, I look forward to what Ms. Edmunds has. I am guessing that it is enough evidence to destroy the current admin (hopefully, to put the whole lot in prison, but even better would be execution for the traitors that they are). That would probably explain why the last appeal went to a very conservative court.If we should be profiling those that commit more crimes, we should be nailing every Mexican and black person that we see because they fit nicely into a profile.
Young black man in Oakland driving a car that was made within the past 5 years = fits the profile of a drug dealer.
If we all thought the way you propose (I'd rather harrass an innocent person that fits a profile..) then we'd be searching nearly everyone.
Unless I am the one group that they don't come after.
+++
My new Home
Looks like somoene needs to see this.
:)
At least someone got it. I didn't get my +4 Funny for nothin'.
--
telnet://sinep.gotdns.com -- TW2002 and LORD registered!
bork bork bork!
Based on your comment, I think you are referring to Groupthink, the unique behavioural trait that sometimes expresses itself whenever otherwise rational people get together in a group, whereupon they make decisions that they wouldn't accept individually.
Some commentators suggest that it is due to a dissociation of responsibility and guilt, e.g. 'I wasn't the only one who backed it.'
Good leadership (even mediocre leadership) should be able to identify this pattern, and stop it. The problem, especially when dealing with Government agencies, or contracted Government work, is that the mediocre tend to rise to the top, as the talented leave at the lower levels, and the people in the positions of responsibility are not adequately equipped to carry out those duties, or accept that responsibility. It's easy when you are only in a position for five years, and the negative effects won't be seen for fifteen.
InfoSec that matters, when it counts.
Sure, Jesus made a statement about you "turning the other cheek"
But in Luke 22:35-38, he also tells his disciples to get swords, even if they had to sell their mantle(cloak or outer robe) to get one.
So self-defense is considered necessary, at times.
Thus, carrying an arm and defending yourself, while not, perhaps, the highest path, is still not an evil path. Personally, I feel that I'm carrying my weapon not just to defend myself, but so I can be more prepared to defend others as well.
Giving Caesar his due could be an early form of seperation of church and state.
The cast the first stone was more along the lines of 'vigilante justice' even for the time. Way out of line.
I don't read AC A human right
"As privacy is not a "liberty," and is not named anywhere in the Constitution, it seems a little privacy is expendable for a lot of security."
with all the posts about how the consitution does not fucking list every right, and how the founding fathers did not even think it was necesary to list SOME of them in the amendments, its amazing even to this day people still bring up the goddam "it's not in Constitution so it's not a right" argument. RTFC (...Constitution) people!
Misdirection.
Privacy cannot logically be a right because it is not an act. It is ignorance of others. It may or may not be wise to promote privacy. But it is not an action that could conceivably be banned -- unlike trade, gunsmanshp, speech, assembly, &c.
-Dan tdaxp
In response to your query about 'if ... leadership can be effective once [groupthink] has become prevalent ...', then the short answer is no.
Long answer, not exactly.
Once Groupthink has become entrenched, it requires a leader with a very high ability to mix the charisma, logic, and personality required in order to sway the mindset of the group.
If the leader is respected, then their dissenting opinion should carry more weight than a dissension from within the group. Once the respect is lost, then the group takes control, and the dissension from the leader is ignored.
InfoSec that matters, when it counts.
There's already a campaign in the UK to try to prevent systems of this order being set up. I recommend signing up for it if you're interested in preventing an inept government stranglehold on the very concept of identity. Or if you don't fancy paying £90 for a completely useless piece of plastic.
For the love of God, please learn to spell "ridiculous"!!!
No, your beliefs are not flawed, IMHO. You're self-consistent. Try this phrase on for size: "Your right to swing your fist ends at my nose."
I'm tolerant of religions, so long as they don't harm anyone, especially someone who hasn't agreed to be part of the religion. Human sacrifices and people blowing themselves up in public places in the name of "god" fail this test.