FISA Not Bush's Only Recent Privacy Outrage

The Bush Administration's revision of FISA is not the only  outrage on individual privacy it has recently perpetrated.  At the same time the administration was pressuring Congress to give it unfettered access to phone calls between people in foreign countries and those in the US, it also pressured the European Union to gather and give to US authorities extensive personal data concerning passengers flying from Europe to the US.

According to the Washington Post, the EU, over objections of its Privacy Commissioner, agreed to turn such data over to US authorities, if it exists in their reservation systems.  The information gathered could include

"racial or ethnic origin, political opinions, religious or philosophical beliefs, trade union membership and data about an individual's health, traveling partners and sexual orientation".

The Post reports:
 
"Airlines do not usually gather such data, but officials say it could wind up in passenger files as a result of requests for special services such as wheelchairs, or through routine questioning by airline personnel and travel agents about contacts, lodging, next of kin and traveling companions. Even a request for a king-size bed at a hotel could be noted in the database."

Once it has this data, the Department of Homeland Security can keep it on file for at least 15 years, with a longer retention period possible as a result of further negotiations.  In part, Homeland Security justifies its need for the data by suggesting that it could be useful if passengers requesting wheelchairs hide bombs in leg casts, or in warning about a threat to a political gathering or a health emergency, such as a contagious disease.  But primarily the Department says it wants wants the data for use in case of events it has not thought of.  

Achieving the agreement was another example of the Administration's heavy-handed tactics in achieving policy goals violative of personal privacy.  A 2004 information gathering program was struck down by the EU's highest court last May.  The ruling gave both sides until July 31 to negotiate a new agreement.  In the face of US threats to turn back flights, the EU, with very strict privacy laws, signed off on this new agreement on July 26.

Unless the European court system again rejects the agreement, Homeland Security will have millions of records of US citizens and non-citizens that it can data mine however it likes.  Given the extensiveness of the information gathered, I need my tinfoil hat to end my speculation as to what they might decide to do with the information.

•  Tips?

  by seeker on Sat Aug 11, 2007 at 10:30:14 PM PDT

•  This is kind of stupid on their part

  Homeland Security, I mean.  All of the information they are gathering is that which has been willingly given to the airlines, right?  I would hazard a guess that for most people this info would be more or less innocuous.  But terrorists or enemy intelligence agents could make sure that whatever disinformation or false leads they wished will end up in Homeland Security's files.  It doesn't seem like anything they might gather on a real security threat would be very reliable, then.

  by Jon Stafford on Sat Aug 11, 2007 at 10:55:21 PM PDT

  •  Excellent point!

    But, I very much doubt they worry about real security.  Getting wharever info on as many people as possible seems to be the goal.  Why?  Power?  Use for future repression of whomever they choose?

    by seeker on Sat Aug 11, 2007 at 11:04:10 PM PDT

    •  True dat

      Although, again, I would bet that most of the stuff they'd get wouldn't really be all that helpful.  I mean, if your comfortable giving it to an airline, how bad could it be?

      But I still don't like it.  I suggest that we all start giving airlines utter nonsense information in an effort to bog down Homeland Security's system.  

      by Jon Stafford on Sat Aug 11, 2007 at 11:08:14 PM PDT

  •  Yep; no good for anti-terrorism, BUT

    Wouldn't it be awfully useful if Bushco wanted to prevent Democrats from flying to YearlyKos, for instance?

    I think it's obvious that this has no good side.

    by neroden on Sun Aug 12, 2007 at 01:03:08 AM PDT

  •  "Innocuous" information can be very dangerous

    Remember that at one point your mother's maiden name and your Social Security Number was innocuous?

    And this danger has already materialized.

    The US prevented Thomas Dullien from attending a computer security conference (in the MSM also sometimes called "hacker conference").

    Dullien has trained people from DoD, DoE, DHS and other unspecified government agencies in computer security.

    Now I do not know exactly why I he was turned away (and I would assume that the reason is classified), but this is the kind of thing we have to be concerned about.

    With all this information on passengers at their fingertips, it will be trivial for DHS to deny anybody they want admission for whatever reason they make up (immigration officers can already deny anybody they like, but they have to follow internal policies to prevent excessive discrimination, for instance).

    For instance, with all this data on the fingertips, they can classify anybody who orders a vegetarian meal as "might be a granola loving liberal" and send them to secondary inspection. If the same person also is a member of a trade union, they could be summarily deported.

    Or they can use that information to prevent people from attending peace demonstrations.

    Or they can abuse this type of information in any number of other ways.

    Don't be complacent about "innocuous" information.

    by sdgeek on Sun Aug 12, 2007 at 04:17:37 AM PDT

    •  I don't disagree...

      ...but I still think it wouldn't work for them very well.  Hitler, for example, was a vegetarian.  And he was pretty conservative.  But I do see where you're going with this.

      by Jon Stafford on Sun Aug 12, 2007 at 10:37:29 PM PDT

•  East Berlin -- flash back

   When there was an East and West Germany I traveled to East Berlin, via Check Point Charlie. There was a brief thaw and it was easier to get a day pass into the commie side of Berlin.

   First we were hit with all the cautions -- don't take photos of XXXXX number of things. (like the tanks hidden from the view of the west side).

   I don't believe I took many photos -- wondering if my camera would be taken and film destroyed.

   Today I have the same doubts and worries -- can I take a photo of the mud flat (with the oil refinery in the background)? What if I take a photo of a bridge?

   This IS supposed to be America -- land of the "free". But under the bush gang it is really more like communist East Berlin.

  by Carib and Ting on Sat Aug 11, 2007 at 11:22:02 PM PDT

•  Hoovering up useless information

  So they're just planning to collect irrelevant information on as many people as they can, for no good reason.  Information which has no legitimate law enforcement or anti-terrorism purpose.  But information which can be used to target and discriminate against (for instance) gays, trade union members, atheists, blacks, and Democrats.

  More proto-fascism.  Why am I not surprised?

  by neroden on Sun Aug 12, 2007 at 01:01:45 AM PDT