You Are a Suspect

NY TIMES via Drudge ^ | william safire

[DAnconia55]

You Are a Suspect
By WILLIAM SAFIRE

ASHINGTON — If the Homeland Security Act is not amended before passage, here is what will happen to you:
Every purchase you make with a credit card, every magazine subscription you buy and medical prescription you fill, every Web site you visit and e-mail you send or receive, every academic grade your receive, every bank deposit you make, every trip you book and every event you attend — all these transactions and communications will go into what the Defense Department describes as "a virtual, centralized grand database."

[xdem]

Can you point me to the place where it says, "Except when at war" in the bill of rights?

[dirtboy]

But once again, what prevents the fedgov from implementing a top-down restructuring of all systems mandating one type of storage, etc.

The free market, plus the fact it would kill innovation in IS? I can't even begin to imagine the feds mandating this.

It would be a bonus for MS and IBM if you ask me...

I'm sure Larry Ellison would love for the feds to declare Oracle the database standard, even though it couldn't possible handle petabyte data structures. But it won't happen. Corporate America rolls over for a lot of fed abuses. But this would hammer their bottom line, and they won't go for it.

[nanny]

[I read the article and all I can say is who cares about privacy anymore? Let them collect all the data they want and if it happens to harm someone or a group of people, tough luck.]

What if you happen to be one of that group? Tough luck? Or your wife? Or your children?

I am going to find that old piece written, I believe, about the holocaust - that stated "I did not help when they came for a certain group because it did not affect me - etc., until - When they came for me - there was no one to help."

Now if read properly, my life, my credit history, everything about me would put an investigator to sleep - but there is always the off chance (or pretty good chance) that the information can be twisted and misused.

[dirtboy]

Only the statement by Ashcroft. It must be somewhere around here.

I'll look for it later. Do you know about when Ashcroft made this statement?

[antidisestablishment]

Modelling the way the feds envision would be like trying to pick up a china cup with a backhoe.

Wrong! I know it is possible to operate a backhoe that well. However, it is impossible to do all that the feds are asking. LOL

[dirtboy]

LOL, I agree about the "model" concept. However mandating that all companies doing business in the U.S. notify the fedgov of patterns or actual purchases would be a simple solution...make the private sector do the work in other words! You and I will have guranteed employment for 20 plus years.

Yep, they can't even get Patriot Act guidelines implemented that are, on paper, fairly simple - mainly because most of the 20-25 million businesses in the country have no idea that these guidelines exist.

[nanny]

["In Germany they [the Nazis] came first for the Communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me, and by that time no one was left to speak up." -- Pastor Martin Niemoeller, 1946. }

Thank you, thank you, thank you. I referenced that in a post just now, but didn't have the entire thing. I have copied and will post it each time someone begins to support such measures.

[aSkeptic]

well written post!!

[Free the USA]

Maybe if I explain that my original response was written for a different debate, the often repeated quote about how those who would give up liberty for security deserve neither. I expected someone to offer that again on this thread and I posted my response without waiting to offer it in reply to a specific post. It expresses no approval of this specific proposal.

[nanny]

[. The proper balance of liberty and security changes as the threats posed by foreign aggressors and terrorist increase. Right now terrorists are a real threat and it is necessary for government to adjust accordingly.]

I see that, but coupled with 'adjustments' to our liberties, shouldn't there be 'adjusments' to the liberties of the foreigners who are here - you know the potential terrorist. The first adjustment should be to do our best to keep more from coming here. My frustration is that is seems our government is not willing to use the laws we already have that would go a long way to protecting us. Instead, they are willing to make rather drastic 'adjustments' in our freedoms in the name of protecting us.

[aSkeptic]

--simultaneously patting your head and rubbing your stomach

Oh thats a good idea! I'll have to remember that one!

[antidisestablishment]

I am not sure about your assertions. As you know, they are not really discussing data systems but meta constructs/languages/protocols (SGML anyone?). And yes, I am aware that SGML is almost as old as me and hasn't become a true standard.

As to whether they could mandate compliance—extortion is the modus operandi of modern government. SSN#, direct deposit, contractor requirements, anyone? If the government forced the large players in any sector to standardize, even the smaller companies would follow suit pretty rapidly.

[Nuke'm Glowing]

LOL, basically you and I are in agreement. What makes me wonder is just which profiteer (me,me,me,me) will propose mandating the system requirements to do business with the U.S. Government which will make their designs possible. It's beyond the scope of my imagination, however, I can see where it might happen. I hope not, because as you say, it will stifle development. On the flip side, Ellison has to be licking his chops at this prospect.

[Nuke'm Glowing]

Sorry about that, I misunderstood the entire scope of your thread; obviously we concur that the issues raised are serious for those who value freedom.

[Deb]

Well, I don't believe I am wrong (I saw the press conference), but lets say I am. So what?

I would much rather have the governemnt err on the side of over-protection, than under-protection.

They are welcome to monitor anything and everything I come in contact with. I don't break laws and I don't have anything to hide. I volunteer my records. It's not an invasion of privacy if you welcome the process.

Clinton did eight years of damage to this country without any of the things conspiracy paranoids scream about today. And any Clinton clone who might get elected will do the same, regardless of existing law. Everyone knows, the Left had 40 years to restrict the power of the good guys to defend us. It's now time to stop the bad guys.

Give us a call when any part of the Homeland Security bill touches you.

[dirtboy]

They are welcome to monitor anything and everything I come in contact with. I don't break laws and I don't have anything to hide. I volunteer my records. It's not an invasion of privacy if you welcome the process.

That's the whole point, Deb. It is your perogative to surrender your own rights voluntarily. It is NOT your perogative to have me surrender mine against my will. Oh, and BTW, I have never been convicted of anything worse than a traffic ticket. It's not that I have something to hide. It's that I have something to protect - my rights.

[usadave]

As soon as all the white boys stop cruising the black neighborhoods for drugs then the war on drugs will be over.

To be fair, you should include black boys, Latino boys, and Asian boys to this list.

[Skywalk]

With our schools being changed to conform to the Prussian fascist/socialist model, technocratic policy controls over society, social engineering, manufacturing consent through media propaganda(the ONE point I agree with Chomsky on, though he got the specifics wrong) and encroachment upon our liberties by BOTH parties, how can any sane person not understand that this has all been planned???

[nanny]

[Does anyone think this is really news? All that stuff is available to the government (and many others) now. If you don't think it is, you live in a dream world.]

That is so true. WE all know it already. You see, what this homeland bill does is make it 'legal' for them tohave it and it is telling us they will use it, - legally. That is the difference.

[jenny65]

Sure, I have trust in the officials NOW, it is the next adminstration like the Clintons that I worry about.

NONE of them should have this kind of power. Doesn't matter who the hell it is.