Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Common Sense and Computer Analysis
Washington Post ^ | May 31, 2004 | Heather Mac Donald

Posted on 05/31/2004 12:07:22 AM PDT by FairOpinion

Irrational paranoia about computer technology threatens to shut down an entire front in the war on terror.

A prestigious advisory panel has just recommended that the Defense Department get permission from a federal court any time it wants to use computer analysis on its own intelligence files. It would be acceptable, according to the panel, for a human agent to pore over millions of intelligence records looking for al Qaeda suspects who share phone numbers, say, and have traveled to terror haunts in South America. But program a computer to make that same search, declares the advisory committee, and judicial approval is needed, because computer analysis of intelligence databanks allegedly violates "privacy."

This nonsensical rule is the latest development in the escalating triumph of privacy advocacy over common sense.

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: counterterrorism; heathermacdonald; privacy
This is crazy.

Then when the next attack happens, we can have another commission to look into why the intel agencies weren't allowed to use computer analysis to correlate data, which may have prevented it.

1 posted on 05/31/2004 12:07:22 AM PDT by FairOpinion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion

Another point, which I think I read elsewhere too:

"The advisory committee's technophobia does not end with intelligence analysis. It would also require the defense secretary to give approval for, and certify the absolute necessity of, Google searches by intelligence agents. Even though any 12-year-old with a computer can freely surf the Web looking for Islamist chat rooms, defense analysts may not do so, according to the panel, without strict oversight."


2 posted on 05/31/2004 12:08:31 AM PDT by FairOpinion (If you are not voting for Bush, you are voting for the terrorists.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion

Exactly... a discriminant computer program can isolate patterns humans miss. If we had that kind of program that looked for key patterns in terrorist activity before 9/11, we might have nipped in the bud. As for the objection it invades privacy, our privacy has already been invaded by every one from doctors to marketers. Who does it harm if law enforcement learns what it needs to know? Certainly not the innocent. Only those who wish to hide malovent acts against our country would not want to be uncovered by the type of computer program Heather MacDonald writes about in her column.


3 posted on 05/31/2004 12:19:03 AM PDT by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop

They are looking for patterns in a huge amount of data, that is literally similar to looking for a needle in a haystack, and to deny intel agencies to use computerized data mining, is denying them timely information.

There is no way humans can look through the vast amount of data in a timely manner.

I remember they were talking about some info that related to 9-11, which was in the system, but they didn't actually "Process" it, until way after 9-11.


4 posted on 05/31/2004 12:25:16 AM PDT by FairOpinion (If you are not voting for Bush, you are voting for the terrorists.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion

The problem is this "prestigious advisory panel". Obviously a bunch of know-nothing political appointees, without a single staff-hour of intelligence experience between them.


5 posted on 05/31/2004 1:25:22 AM PDT by Clock King
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion

We need to have the people who issue such assinine "opinions" to be held responsible for the results that follow. For example, if we get hit again by terrorism, and it can be shown beyond a reasonable doubt that the opinions of said committee are responsible for blinding us to the problem, all members of the committee get lined up and summarily executed. This should ensure the next committee is more responsible with its opinions.


6 posted on 05/31/2004 5:35:09 AM PDT by thoughtomator (Any "church" that can't figure out abortion and homosexuality isn't worthy of the appellation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop

Of course this stupidity will be put aside. Almost all PC and political idiocy is subject to change - the only question is how many Americans must die before it does.


7 posted on 05/31/2004 5:44:20 AM PDT by ZeitgeistSurfer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion; All
The defense secretary should reject the panel's recommendations, which are based neither in logic nor in law. The government receives 126 million intelligence intercepts a day. Humans cannot possibly keep up with the intelligence tidal wave; anti-terror agents miss connections between suspects, places and events every day. Computer analysis of intelligence data is not merely optional, it is virtually required, for the government to have any hope of extracting evidence of terrorist activity from the tsunami of possibly relevant information. To demand a laborious court appeal every time the government wants to sift that data electronically would bring our intelligence efforts to a halt, and leave us vulnerable to the next terror attack.

These "privacy fascists" including William Safire would disarm us rather than have some dumb computer scan their precious telephone bill.

It's not about you, you idiots. It's about life or death, tens of thousands of deaths.

8 posted on 05/31/2004 6:21:29 AM PDT by aculeus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion

Other than Floyd Abrams and Lloyd Cutler, who are named in the article, who are the other members of this advisory committee?


9 posted on 05/31/2004 6:34:29 AM PDT by Leroy S. Mort
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion
Nevermind, I found it:

Defense Department Announces Total Information Awareness Oversight Boards
2/7. The Department of Defense (DOD) announced in a release that it "will establish two boards to provide oversight of the Total Information Awareness Project, the program designed to develop tools to track terrorists. The two boards, an internal oversight board and an outside advisory committee, will work with the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), as it continues its research. These boards will help ensure that TIA develops and disseminates its products to track terrorists in a manner consistent with U.S. constitutional law, U.S. statutory law, and American values related to privacy."

 

The DARPA web site has described the TIA as a project that "will imagine, develop, apply, integrate, demonstrate and transition information technologies, components and prototype, closed-loop, information systems that will counter asymmetric threats by achieving total information awareness useful for preemption; national security warning; and national security decision making."

The members of the outside board will included Newton Minow (Northwestern University), Floyd Abrams (Cahill Gordon & Reindel), Zoe Baird (President of the Markle Foundation), Griffin Bell (King & Spalding), Gerhard Casper (Stanford University Law School), William Coleman (Chief Customer Advocate of BEA), Lloyd Cutler (Wilmer Cutler & Pickering).

Loaded with Clintonistas...figures.
10 posted on 05/31/2004 6:46:31 AM PDT by Leroy S. Mort
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Leroy S. Mort

This is just so ridiculous.

Getting advice from clueless individuals with axes to grind, on matters of our survival.


11 posted on 05/31/2004 8:48:36 AM PDT by FairOpinion (If you are not voting for Bush, you are voting for the terrorists.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson