Now that the ACLU is condeming CAPPS II, will it hurt Clark?

[HFishbine]

From the ACLU

The Bush Administration is moving forward with a secretive new system for conducting background checks on all airline passengers that threatens to create a blacklist of Americans who cannot travel freely. This new government program, called Computer-Assisted Passenger Pre-Screening System or CAPPS II -- would search secret intelligence and law enforcement databases and rate every airline passenger a red-, yellow- or green-level threat.

Using easily falsified information such as name, home address, home phone number and date of birth, this system would screen your name through credit databases and then run your information through secret government databases to make a judgment about your security risk. These secret databases would probably be compiled using intelligence and law enforcement records that could include personal information gleaned from commercial data such as purchase history and banking records.

Based on all of this information, you may be allowed to travel, be forced to undergo special security scrutiny, or be referred to law enforcement and possibly detained. If you are branded a "risk" due to false information, the process for correcting the error is unclear and could result in significant delays or detention for many innocent people.

The Bush Administration is pushing this program forward despite opposition by airlines, Members of Congress and privacy advocacy organizations.

http://www.aclu.org/Privacy/Privacy.cfm?ID=12108&c=39

Kucinich Condemns It

snip>>>>
"The Administration is turning every airline ticket counter into a Big Brother Booth. Our freedoms and our liberties are on the line. This Administration is moving with breathtaking speed to demolish the Bill of Rights and privacy protections. In a democratic society we have a right to live free and they're taking that right away.
snip>>>>

snip>>>>
"The new system will require all airline passengers to provide their full names, home addressees, phone numbers, and dates of birth when they book flights. The government will feed that information into databases and produce profiles on all passengers. The databases will include government records, information from commercial systems such as Lexis-Nexis and Acxiom, and mailing lists and other commercial information. And the databases will be secret, and therefore no one will have any idea why they would be given a specific security level."
snip>>>>

http://www.kucinich.us/statements.htm#AirlineProfile

Clark Worked to Make it Happen...

Retired Gen. Wesley K. Clark helped an Arkansas information company win a contract to assist development of an airline passenger screening system, one of the largest surveillance programs ever devised by the government.

Starting just after the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks, Clark sought out dozens of government and industry officials on behalf of Acxiom Corp., a data powerhouse that maintains names, addresses and a wide array of personal details about nearly every adult in the United States and their households, according to interviews and documents.

Clark, a Democrat who declared himself a presidential candidate 10 days ago, joined Acxiom's board of directors in December 2001. He earned $300,000 from Acxiom last year and was set to receive $150,000, plus potential commissions, this year, according to financial disclosure records. He owns several thousand shares of Acxiom stock worth more than $67,000.

Clark's consulting role at Acxiom puts him near the center of a national debate over expanded government authority to use personal data and surveillance technology to fight the war on terrorism and protect homeland security.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A7380-2003Sep26?language=printer

...As a Registered Lobbyist:

[gandalf]

1. Lexis Nexis entries

So, if I write a letter to the editor about 9/11, my name would show up (at least in) Lexis Nexis via the newspaper that published my letter? That sounds good, if they view Greens as a security risk (cf. http://www.alternet.org/print.html?StoryID=17540).

Anyway, the data mining business seems to be prospering. Which shares to buy?

[evil_orange_cat]

2. Clark isn't the best candidate for civil liberties...

his strength is foreign policy... ;)

[Meritaten1]

4. No, he could be one of the better candidates on civil liberties

because his background should make him aware of the enormous potential data mining offers for government and corporate intrusions into privacy.

The recent advances in database technology (increased data storage ability, proliferation of databases, development of XML) mean that problems associated with uncontrolled data collection may become increasingly significant. Nothing written to a government agency, published online or appearing in a newspaper is private anymore, nor is any transaction requiring public recording e.g. taking out a mortgage, buying a house, probating a will... Corporations sometimes sell privately collected database information (e.g. profiles compiled from lists of the sites an Internet surfer visits, the products they buy, the ads they "click" on etc.,..) as well. And potentially "web bugs," bits of malicious code, can snoop on individual computer contents without alerting firewalls. There are probably many other even more intrusive data collection technologies. So the zone of privacy decreases every day.

Clark has emphasized the importance of protecting the right to dissent, and a policy posted on his campaign site calls for Congress to review the "Patriot Act" and eliminate some provisions. There is also a warning about yet another bill the Bush administration wants passed that would impact judges.

[tom_paine]

7. I agree. Whatever Clark did in the past...he understands the danger of

the present.

[liberalhistorian]

3. If you've written any kind of letter

anywhere it will show up on the database. I googled my name and discovered that even letters I'd written to the FDA were right there, along with all the others I'd written and every other time my name was mentioned on any document anywhere.

People have already been prevented from flying due to their political expressions and views. I've contacted all of my reps about this fascist, police state program, and I refuse to fly one single mile if it's implemented in any form, and I know many others who feel the same way. That's a major reason why the airlines have all fought against its implementation.

[gandalf]

5. That is quite frightening

Why does that not arouse more interest?

[gandalf]

6. Obviously not

considering the interest this thread aroused here...

[DrBB]

8. Clark openly calls for rolling back USAPatriot Act

Do we care what his actual position is? Probably not. But just in case (and before this thread gets moved to GD2004), here's what it is:

We must give law enforcement every appropriate tool to fight terrorism, both at home and abroad. But the Patriot Act, which was designed and passed in haste, must be revised to better protect our civil liberties. I am outraged that John Ashcroft's Justice Department refuses to submit such a sensitive and important measure to legislative oversight.

I call on Congress to review the Patriot Act, to assess what works and what needs to be changed. We should immediately suspend the provisions that allow searches and seizure without subpoenas and warrants. Until we know more about any possible abuses of the Act, I would limit the Justice Department's use of its powers to the prevention and prosecution of terrorism.

And now back to self-defeating internecine warfare, already in progress....

[gandalf]

9. Thanks for the info! n/t

[HFishbine]

10. That's great!

Now if Clark would simply address the discrepencies between his rhetoric and his actions.