Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Identity Dominance: the US Military's Biometric War In Afghanistan

Posted by timothy on from the just-want-to-borrow-your-eyeball dept.

Advocatus Diaboli (1627651) writes "For years the U.S. military has been waging a biometric war in Afghanistan, working to unravel the insurgent networks operating throughout the country by collecting the personal identifiers of large portions of the population. A restricted U.S. Army guide on the use of biometrics in Afghanistan obtained by Public Intelligence provides an inside look at this ongoing battle to identify the Afghan people."

12 of 83 comments (clear)

  1. So... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 2

    I take it that this is going to be a beta test and that as soon (or sooner) than we eventually GTFO of that sand-trap, the same vendors will pop up with a variety of exciting new biometric homeland security and law enforcement solutions?

  2. Sounds like it could work here too.. by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 2

    From the TFA...

    "Locate and identify every resident (visit and record every house and business). At a minimum, fully biometrically enroll all military-age males as follows: Full sets of fingerprints, Full face photo, Iris scans, Names and all variants of names
    Use badging to identify local leaders, and key personnel.
    Track persons of interest; unusual travel patterns may indicate unusual activities."

    "All biometric data collected (is) sent back to the DOD’s Automated Biometric Identification System (ABIS) located in West Virginia, where it is stored and also shared with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and FBI. Partnerships with other nations also allow the DOD to run data against biometrics collected by foreign governments and law enforcement."

  3. Does that make Obama a "neocon"? by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 2, Informative

    >> The neoconservatives know better than to let a perfectly good crisis go to waste

    Does that make Obama a "neocon"? (If he really wanted us out of those places, he'd have done it by now.)

    BTW, the "never let a good crisis go to waste" quote is frequently attributed to Obama's former chief of staff and long-time Chicago associate Rahm Emanuel:
    http://www.brainyquote.com/quo...

    1. Re:Does that make Obama a "neocon"? by ShakaUVM · · Score: 2, Insightful

      >He's also well to the right of most republicans from forty years ago, but there again, so are most democrats today - and practically all republicans now.

      Let's test this thesis of yours. With an actual test.

      Who said this?

      1) "Today, we need a nation of Minutemen, citizens who are not only prepared to take arms, but citizens who regard the preservation of freedom as the basic purpose of their daily life and who are willing to consciously work and sacrifice for that freedom."

      Was it: A) Cliven Bundy, B) John F. Kennedy, C) Rush Limbaugh, or D) Ted Nugent?

      2) "Certainly one of the chief guarantees of freedom under any government, no matter how popular and respected, is the right of the citizens to keep and bear arms. [...] the right of the citizens to bear arms is just one guarantee against arbitrary government and one more safeguard against a tyranny which now appears remote in America, but which historically has proved to be always possible."

      Was it: A) Obama, B) Hubert Humphrey, C) Ronald Reagan, or D) The Tea Party?

      3) "Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable."

      Was it: A) Antonin Scalia, B) John F. Kennedy, C) Che Guevara, or D) Al Gore?

      Ok, that might have been too easy. How about this one:

      4) "The people of the United States should be forbidden to have in their possession any firearms, or any other type of weapon. The possession of weapons can make it difficult to collect taxes and dues and supports rebellion."

      Was it: A) FDR, B) Al Gore, C) Truman, or D) Harry Reid?

      If you want to cheat, these quotes can be found here: http://catb.org/~esr/guns/quot...

      But more importantly, think about your thought processes as you try to answer them. Nobody would seriously think that Obama would ever in a thousand years say something like #2 (in fact, if you didn't laugh at that option, you probably don't have much of a sense of humor). But we'd seriously have to consider if it was Al Gore or Harry Reid that said that, since, again, the older Democrats were far to the right of the modern party.

      JFK fought with Nixon in the debates over who was more anti-communist, and LBJ had that whole Vietnam thing. Modern Democrats are far, far to the left of the older Democrat party on most issues. Read LBJ talk about how the federal government shouldn't be in the business of law enforcement some time, and then contrast that against Harry Reid calling in snipers to try to push Cliven Bundy off his ranch.

    2. Re:Does that make Obama a "neocon"? by Shakrai · · Score: 2

      and then contrast that against Harry Reid calling in snipers to try to push Cliven Bundy off his ranch.

      They aren't trying to push him off his ranch, they're trying to enforce a valid court order that says he can't graze his cattle on BLM managed lands without paying the appropriate fees. Whatever else you think about Federal land management policy (I think it's absurd Uncle Sam owns >80% of Nevada, but that's another discussion) you can't allow someone to so brazenly flaunt lawful judicial orders.

      Armed citizens interfering with the enforcement of court orders, in a matter regarding the collection of monies owed to the Federal Government that have been confirmed by multiple courts of contempt jurisdiction after the debtor received due process of law? That's completely unacceptable. Do they really want to play the game by 18th Century rules? Uncle Sam should call their bluff and send in a Federalized militia to enforce the lawful orders of the Federal Judiciary.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
  4. 1984+4+4+4+4+4+4+4+4,,,, by harvey+the+nerd · · Score: 2

    Frightening. Societally, worse than the diseases and broken bodies that come home from these wars. Many third world countries will soon be more free than the USSA - time to emigrate.

    1. Re:1984+4+4+4+4+4+4+4+4,,,, by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 2

      >> Many third world countries will soon be more free than the USSA - time to emigrate.

      "Freer" until you're killed by an executive-ordered, zero-oversight drone strike.

      Oh wait, that can happen here too.
      http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...
      http://www.motherjones.com/moj...

  5. Makes superstition look good by WillAdams · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Pretty soon all criminals, insurgents, terrorists and revolutionaries will find themselves practicing the same sort of precautions people used to use to protect themselves against ``witchcraft'':

      - not allowing any hair (or skin cells) to be taken by another
      - not allowing any instance of bleeding to stain anywhere someone else might have access to it
      - not allowing their picture to be taken, lest it steal their soul

    --
    Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
  6. one saving grace by dlt074 · · Score: 2

    getting the info off the devices and back to the DOD does not always happen. i know of numerous times an entire missions worth of data was never uploaded to a computer and/or never sent any further up the chain. it may be collected, but it's not all getting where they want it.

    and from what I saw in two tours, the data that does make it up never amounts to anything actionable. a waste of money and resources right now.

    i think you're right. it is a good place to beta test and will be much more useful here at home, where people are much easier to identify and track.

  7. Yeah, it's tough when we're bad racists. by BrendaEM · · Score: 2

    When you become a better racist, you can identify smaller factions of people.

    Oh, I might be wrong, it just might be a religious thing.

    Ahh, we're over there for the oil.

    Wait, WTF are we doing over there?

    --
    https://www.youtube.com/c/BrendaEM
  8. Interesting Implication of Obvious Implication by Tokolosh · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This item, and the subsequent discussion posts, do not state the obvious implication that this kind of tracking is expected to creep into the US.

    The really interesting part to me, is that nobody found it necessary to say so. It is automatically assumed that anyone reading will immediately come to the same conclusion, and therefore it need not be stated.

    That we have come to this, is scary (notwithstanding my tag).

    --
    Prove anything by multiplying Huge Number times Tiny Number
    1. Re:Interesting Implication of Obvious Implication by Matheus · · Score: 2

      Sad state of the world aside you're missing an important detail... this is *already over here. Do you have a drivers license? You're in a DB. Do you have a Passport? You're in a DB. Have you ever served in any branch of the armed forces? You're in a DB. Have you ever applied for clearance? You're in a DB. Have you ever been arrested for *anything? You're in a DB. As a child did you ever take a field trip to a local police station and get fingerprinted/etc? They kept all that... If you didn't answer yes to any of those questions then go ahead and continue your blissful existence off the grid but else you don't need to be paranoid. It is true. It is not hidden. This is already the way it is.