Congrats to General Clark !

[Hoppin_Mad]

The $830,000 Acxion paid to him for lobbying CAPPS II seems to be paying off ! His $67,000 in stock should be worth more now too !

Well done General !

Air Travel Database Plan Is Set To Advance
U.S. Seeks Passenger Records to Rate Risk

By Sara Kehaulani Goo
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, January 12, 2004; Page A01

Despite stiff resistance from airlines and privacy advocates, the U.S. government plans to push ahead this year with a vast computerized system to probe the backgrounds of all passengers boarding flights in the United States.

-snip-

Privacy and consumer advocates worry that both programs could be discriminatory because they subject airline passengers to different levels of scrutiny. Certain travelers, such as non-U.S. citizens, could face additional questioning under the program known as CAPPS 2, or the second version of the Computer Assisted Passenger PreScreening Program, some organizations say. Business travelers who typically pay high prices for their seats will likely get an easier pass through security in the "registered traveler" program.

-snip-

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A8504-2004Jan11.html

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[mike_c]

2. sorry, I hadn't heard that-- did Clark really lobby...

...in favor of CAPS II? That's the second outrageous thing I've heard about him today (support for SOA was the first). Can you provide a link to substantiate this? Not flaming-- I seriously hadn't heard this.

[Rowdyboy]

3. Thank you for you support

Please send money to help the Democratic party get rid of the Bushes (if thats what you really want).

[mike_c]

7. I don't think there's ever been any ambiguity about my position...

...but just to make certain, I will never support a career militarist who's up to his eyeballs in the MIC and the republican party for president of the United States. Sorry 'bro, no can do. And Clark himself keeps reinforcing my conviction, e.g. with statements in defense of the SOA/WHISC and-- if true-- lobbying Congress in support of CAPS II intrusive passenger databasing.

[Rowdyboy]

Just so there's no ambiguity, I've seen enough McGovern

type anti-war "reformers" humiliated to last a lifetime. Wanna have your nose pushed in the mud by the Republican bully boys? Nominate a northeastern anti-war, pro-middle class tax candidate. That is guaranteed to produce a landslide!

Unfortunately, its a landslide in the wrong fucking direction!

[Hoppin_Mad]

4. Yes he did - From the Washington Post . .

Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, September 27, 2003; Page A08

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.

-snip-

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A7380-2003Sep26¬Found=true

[mike_c]

8. thanks for the link!

eom

[slinkerwink]

6. yes, he did.

[TLM]

Here ya go... this is what Clark did before suddenly wanting to run

http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20031013&s=jones

Acxiom, one of the nation's largest data-mining companies, has actively sought federal contracts related to homeland security in the past two years. In December 2001 Acxiom hired Gen. Wesley Clark, now a Democratic presidential candidate, as a lobbyist and board member to help procure government contracts.



Wall Street Journal, 9/18/03

IN ANNOUNCING his presidential campaign, Wesley K. Clark promoted himself as the candidate best qualified to prosecute the war on terror. As a businessman, he has applied his military expertise to help a handful of high-tech companies try to profit from the fight Since retiring from a 34-year Army career in 2000, Gen. Clark has become : chairman of a suburban Washington technology-corridor start-up, managing director at an investment firm, a director at four other firms around the country and an advisory-board member for two others. For most, he was hired to help boost the companies' military business. .

more....

After the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Gen. Clark counseled clients on how to pitch commercial technologies to the government for homeland-security applications. One is Acxiom Corp., based in Gen. Clark's hometown of Little Rock, Ark., where he formally launched his campaign yesterday. He joined the board of the Nasdaq-traded company in December 2001, as the company started to market its customer-database software to federal agencies eager to hunt for terrorists by scanning and coordinating the vast cyberspace trove of citizen information.

"He has made efforts at putting us in contact with the right people in Washington ... setting up meetings and participating in some himself," says Acxiom Chief Executive Charles Morgan. "Like all of us around 9/11, he had a lot of patriotic fervor about how we can save our country."


<snip>


Stephens Inc., the large, politically connected Little Rock investment firm, hired him to boost its aerospace business shortly after he gave up his NATO command. He left Stephens last year and opened his own consultancy, Wesley K. Clark & Associates. While Gen. Clark was at Stephens, the firm also marketed him to clients such as Silicon Energy-in which Stephens held a stake - "as a good person to help us understand the federal procurement process," says Mr. Woolard. The company was trying to enter the government market, and Gen. Clark explained the process "and contacted people at the Navy and Air Force and told them what we had," Mr. Woolard says. (Silicon Energy was acquired earlier this year by Itron Inc., and Gen. Clark no longer advises the firm).

[Bolo Boffin]

5. *yawn*

http://blogs.salon.com/0002556/2003/09/28.html

[Hoppin_Mad]

9. Sleepy ? Go to bed then -eom-

[slinkerwink]

10. *hands you a pillow to hand to that guy*

;-)

[Hoppin_Mad]

13. Lack of sleep leads to impairment of judgement ! -eom-

[ProudToBeLiberal]

12. maybe he has something down his throat

:shrug: must be big

[Printer70]

15. Can Clark supporters...

..explain why under Clark we won't see more "Patriot Act" like intrusions on privacy and civil liberties? This is not encouraging at all.

[QC]

11. Dean fucked up tonight! Quick, change the subject!!!

It's as regular as clockwork. Every time he lays an egg, anti-Clark threads break out like mushrooms after a rainstorm.

[ProudToBeLiberal]

14. we have the right to protect our candidate

this isn't a facsist country you know. If you want a facsist country go somewhere censorship is welcome.

[QC]

17. Yes, I know we're not "facsist" but I'm just not clear

on how attacking Clark is the right response to an attack by Sharpton against Dean.

It's kinda like beating up the guy across the street because the woman next door let her dog get into your garbage again.

Unless, of course, I'm write about the need to change the subject by diverting attention elsewhere, which seems to be the pattern.

[ProudToBeLiberal]

19. well heres the thing

Clark supporters are constantly bringing up the point that al sharpton made. We are just showing the hypocrisy of brining up that point by showing Clark weaknesses like not appointing openly gay individuals to military post etc

[QC]

21. How does one appoint openly gay individuals to military positions

under the present policy?

One cannot.

So you are pushing a false analogy here.

[ProudToBeLiberal]

23. The fact is

Clark tolerated this policy. Now he is spwewing forth rhetoric saying that he supports gay. If he really does supprt them then he should of come out into the open saying the current system needed revising

[QC]

27. I'm gayer than a tree full of parrots, and I am comfortable with Clark.

He advocates scrapping DADT, as I do, and has spoken out against it.

Please do not try to use my people as a tool for trashing a good man.

[ProudToBeLiberal]

30. your people?

woah. So if someone is white they can't comment on african americans, native americans, hispanics... if someone is gay they can't comment about straight people? Then you better stop talking about my people.

[QC]

32. Let's just say that the homophobic crack you made above

about another poster having something big down his throat leads me to suspect that your concern for "the gay" is not entirely sincere.

[ProudToBeLiberal]

34. hey hey

I'm confused about my sexual orientation.

[Hoppin_Mad]

35. Hmmm - when I read that I thought "hairball" -eom-

[ProudToBeLiberal]

37. that's unfair :(

you don't know my personal life. I have many gay friends that i would protect with my life. your mis characterization is uncalled for. I want an apolgy

[QC]

38. How else is one to interpret that comment?

You're right--I don't know your personal life, friends, etc. All I can go by is what you post here, and what you posted is hard to interpret as anything other than a homophobic remark.

If you did not mean it that way, then I will gladly apologize, but it certainly sounded like anything but a joke.

[ProudToBeLiberal]

39. I accept your apology graciously

weeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

[ProudToBeLiberal]

31. He advocated

scrapping DADT after he came out ofthe military. Why didn't he come against when he was in the military.

[Hoppin_Mad]

20. My post was not a response to anything

I read a JUST PUBLISHED article on Clarks lobbying efforts paying off for that spy company, so I thought it noteworthy.

Sorry you don't find it so.

Maybe you should retreat to the clark blog if you don't want to read any posts critical of your candidate.

-edit clarity + spelling

[Hoppin_Mad]

16. If Clark would actually SHOW UP at a debate

intstead of hiding in his spider hole, we could talk about him too !

I read he spoke to a half empty hall tonight - that means half the people made the right choice !

[Printer70]

22. Ignoring another criticism

...part of a trend in the Clark camp. Please note these charges add up and give the impression that Clark doesn't know what team he bats for, no matter how many times he tells us he's a "real Democrat". I don't think too many of us are thrilled that he supports these kinds of measures that reek "Patriot Act", supports murderous School of Americas, etc.

[slinkerwink]

25. they always deflect the real question at hand by attacking those

who ask the questions.

[Printer70]

29. It's bizarre

I've seen the tactic before but it seems like everyone in the Clark camp refuses to answer questions (or answers them without proof), and then attacks the questioner or another candidate. I don't why this is. Maybe they have an emotional attachment to Clark or like him solely based on "electability" and can't defend his record. But it is bizarre- I've never had such unproductive discussions before.

[Hoppin_Mad]

33. It just like those Kool Aid Konservatives defending chimpy -eom-

[Printer70]

41. Yes- they use nonsense whereas Clark camp uses silence

eom

[FrenchieCat]

18. Reality Check time.....

Defending Wesley Clark from the stones and arrows flying in from all directions could prove to be a full-time job. Fortunately most of the arrows are blunted and the stones fall well short of their mark.

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.

CAPPS II was to be a database of information such as housing stats, telephone numbers, and car ownership. The government can already access most of this information through DMV records (see the Driver's Privacy Protection Act of 1994), state property tax records and phone bills for toll free government numbers, which document the number of every caller, listed or unlisted.

Thanks to the Social Security Administration, the federal government possesses the social security number of every citizen who has one, along with his or her name, birthdate, and latest known address. Based on annual tax filings, the government knows where people work, how much money they make, how many dependents they claim and the social security numbers of those dependents. They know even more about those who itemize, such as where their children attend daycare or whether the person likes to gamble.

In truth, privacy is a myth when it comes to personal information.

The problem isn't the information, available for anyone to find; rather, it's how the government uses it.

Following 9/11, Congress voted away citizens' rights and passed the PATRIOT Act, which was ostensibly for fighting terrorism but in reality has often been applied to non-terrorist crimes, like drug trafficking, insider trading, and blackmail. Terrorism prevention was a ruse to convince lawmakers to broaden the government's powers to invade the privacy of its citizens at will with little oversight.

Clark, as he did while lobbying on behalf of Acxiom, stresses the need to balance citizens' reasonable expectations of privacy against the needs of the government to derail terrorism. He has called for a halt on any effort to expand the Patriot Act and believes the act itself it requires a complete review.

...one of the risks you have in this operation is that you’re giving up some of the essentials of what it is in America to have justice, liberty and the rule of law. I think you’ve got to be very, very careful when you abridge those rights to prosecute the war on terrorists.

Clark's involvement with Acxiom is a non-issue... like many other non-issues the media seems to be pursuing. The problem isn't Acxiom, which is merely another company taking advantage of capitalism and angling for a lucrative contract. The problem is the CAPPS II program created by the government, and not because it violates privacy. Again, the information is already out there and was never private to begin with. Nobody broke the law to obtain it.
http://blogs.salon.com/0002556/2003/09/28.html

[Hoppin_Mad]

24. You should edit that dowm - the mods will get ya

Plus someone else already posted it.

[slinkerwink]

36. I'd still like to hear a debunking on FrenchieClark's post from you

let's show them that we do answer to every single piece of info!

[sleipnir]

40. Hummm...I'd like to read it too, but for my own edification on the issue

[Hoppin_Mad]

42. If this doesm't scare you off of Clark >

I don't know what will.

More information has come to light in the JetBlue/CAPPS II incident regarding the role of data broker Acxiom and its rainmaker-slash-board-member (and now-presidential candidate) Gen. Wesley Clark.

You may recall that the incident involved a strange cross-pollination of executive agency functions as a U.S. Army contractor, Torch Concepts, tested a program purportedly intended for the Transportation Security Administration, an agency of the Department of Homeland Security. That program is CAPPS II, the air-travel customer profiling system set to go online early next year, assigning every American who travels by commercial airliner a color-code based on a purported threat level generated by computer algorithms.

The JetBlue scandal arose when it was found out that the airline violated its privacy policy by releasing 5 million "passenger name records" to Torch Concepts. Torch Concepts then crossreferenced those records with information from data-broker Acxiom. That information included such data as gender, residence information, children, Social Security Number, vehicles, occupation and income. In a presentation foolishly posted to the web, complete with at least one passenger's social security number, the test system seemed to flag everyone who wasn't "Young Middle Income Home Owners with Short Length-of-Residence" or "Older Upper Income Home Owners with Longer Length-of-Residence" as a potential terrorist threat worthy of extra airport searches by federal TSA agents.

-snip-

http://www.nccprivacy.org/handv/031006villain.htm

[Bolo Boffin]

26. How is a database of publicly available information...

...a violation of privacy?

Clark's involvement with Acxiom is a non-issue, like many other non-issues the media seems to be pursuing. The problem isn't Acxiom, which is merely another company taking advantage of capitalism and angling for a lucrative contract. The problem is the CAPPS II program created by the government, and not because it violates privacy. Again, the information is already out there and was never private to begin with. Nobody broke the law to obtain it. The concern is that the program is not foolproof, and innocent people will be scrutinized, which already occurs under the system in place. CAPPS II could only be an improvement over the current system if it is subjected to proper protocols of oversight and scrutiny to prevent abuse.

And could somebody hand me my teddy bear? Tanx, y'all are the best...

[ProudToBeLiberal]

28. that teddy bear is mine :[

tarnation people these days