[IMC-US] FW: Press release: Total Information Awareness & Beyond: Threats to Privacy in a Post 9-11 America

[Tribal Scribal]

FYI:




>From: "Bill of Rights Defense Committee" <newsletter at bordc.org>
>Reply-To: <newsletter at bordc.org>
>To: <newsletter at bordc.org>
>Subject: Press release: Total Information Awareness & Beyond: Threats to 
>Privacy in a Post 9-11 America
>Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2004 14:10:23 -0400
>
>July 26, 2004
>For Immediate Release
>
>
>Bill of Rights Defense Committee
>
>241 King St., Suite 216
>
>Northampton, MA 01060
>
>413-582-0110
>
>info at bordc.org
>
>
>
>Total Information Awareness & Beyond: Threats to Privacy in a Post 9-11
>America
>
>
>July 26, 2004, Northampton, MA: It would be hard to forget the dramatic
>public denunciation of John Poindexter's Total/Terrorism Information
>Awareness (TIA) project last year. Congress gave into citizen pressure and
>voted to defund the controversial plan to build a centralized database of
>private transactional data on all Americans. However, neither TIA nor data
>mining have left the government's counterterrorism toolbox.
>
>
>
>A new paper by the Bill of Rights Defense Committee (bordc.org)* details
>fourteen government data surveillance programs that are going on right now,
>including TIA itself. The paper explains how these programs endanger Fourth
>Amendment and privacy rights and suggests that new laws and regulations are
>needed to adequately protect citizen privacy.
>
>
>
>More concerning than what is in the report, however, is what is left out.
>Author of the paper, Shannon Anderson, remarks, "The most troubling aspect
>of these data surveillance systems is their lack of government 
>transparency.
>Government agencies change program names, hide their budgets in
>discretionary funding, and mislead the public about their status. When you
>have Tom Ridge driving a stake through the heart of CAPPS II one day and 
>DHS
>officials saying the program is still alive the next, what are citizens
>supposed to believe?"
>
>
>
>Anderson also notes that, "Unfortunately, data surveillance is a just a
>slice in the pie of post 9-11 privacy infringements." (See Graphic below)**
>Since the terrorist attacks, the FBI has relaxed its guidelines for
>infiltrating political and religious groups. Moreover, because of USA
>PATRIOT Act sections 216 and 217, investigators have greater authority to
>monitor e-mail and internet use. These provisions have encouraged the FBI 
>to
>further implement its Carnivore Internet Communications System, which the
>agency renamed DCS 1000 after public abhorrence to the name "Carnivore."
>
>
>
>Equally concerning is the decrease in privacy for attorney-client
>communications. An October 2001 Bureau of Prisons order allows federal
>agents to monitor conversations between lawyers and their clients held in
>federal custody, and the agents do not need to notify the client and
>attorney if a court authorizes the monitoring.
>
>
>
>The federal government is not alone in its attack on privacy. Local
>governments have also implemented measures that infringe on privacy, such 
>as
>large-scale video surveillance.
>
>
>
>Taken in totality, these government projects paint a harrowing picture of
>post 9-11 privacy. Especially during this election season, the BORDC
>encourages citizens to ask their elected officials two big questions: Are
>these technology systems and counterterrorism measures making us safer? And
>even if they are, is the cost to our privacy and civil rights worth it?
>
>
>
>*The Bill of Rights Defense Committee (bordc.org) is a national nonprofit
>organization that encourages communities to take an active role in an
>ongoing national debate about the USA PATRIOT Act and other antiterrorism
>measures that threaten civil liberties guaranteed by the Bill of Rights. To
>help educate voters in the upcoming elections on where candidates stand on
>civil liberties issues, BORDC has just introduced a how-to guide for
>developing candidate questionnaires and publicizing the results.  It
>includes sample questions on civil liberties topics that local BORDCs and
>other organizations can include in questionnaires or directly ask 
>candidates
>for national, state, and local office at candidate forums, debates, etc.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>