Private manufactures enthuse that it’s like having an extra police officer in every patrol car while saving on personnel costs. Opponents of excessive government intrusion warn it will allow law enforcement to spy on innocent people by tracking their whereabouts.
The intelligence community is awash in information and still struggles to understand how it can be fully utilized to fight terrorism. At the same time, the government has not done enough to protect American citizens from privacy intrusions and civil liberties abuses resulting from the collection of intelligence and surveillance by authorities.
Since its inception, the Department of Homeland Security has promoted modern technology as a way to save the nation from terrorism, and it’s done so in part by emulating the Pentagon’s preoccupation with science and experimentation. Some of the country’s most significant achievements, in fact, were conceived by pioneering researchers the government hired to help give warfighters an advantage over their enemies.
.jpg)
The government of Mexico earlier this year signed a $32 million contract with Pennsylvania-based Unisys Corp. to develop a massive database of eye, fingerprint and facial biometric information collected from as many as 110 million of that country’s citizens. The database would correspond to information contained in individual ID cards.
The Department of Homeland Security has acknowledged the existence of three more intelligence analysis systems that appear to include information about the American people, according to documents obtained by the Center for Investigative Reporting.
A passenger-screening system designed to help capture terrorists could also be used to target people suspected of violent crimes, under a proposal approved by Department of Homeland Security officials.
Previously, government officials said the surveillance system known as CAPPS II would be used only to target potential terrorists and their allies -- limits intended to assuage concerns about the program's impact on privacy and civil liberties.
Plans called for using commercial information services to sort through demographic and marketing data to establish whether passengers are "rooted in the community." Classified government computers would then review passengers with questionable reports for signs of terrorist intent.
The new proposal shows that officials intend to use the system -- potentially the largest surveillance network created by the government -- more broadly to keep dangerous people off planes. That could include people wanted for domestic terrorism or violent crimes.
Anyone flagged by the system would receive extra screening or, in some circumstances, be detained.
A draft of a notice to be published in the Federal Register says "such information may be shared between law enforcement agencies and the Department of Homeland Security and appropriate action may be taken." The document was reviewed by White House officials and signed by Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge several days ago.
The document is the latest turn in the belabored creation of CAPPS II, a system that Transportation Secretary Norman Y. Mineta described a year ago as the "the foundation" on which all other, more public security measures depend.
Officials envision deploying CAPPS II -- short for the second-generation computer-assisted passenger pre-screening system -- to screen truckers, railroad conductors and other transportation workers.
Although officials had said CAPPS II would be operational by now, it has been delayed by questions about the proper technology and its potential intrusiveness.
Civil libertarians complained earlier this year when Transportation Department lawyers issued a proposal that left open the possibility that the government could collect and keep a wide variety of records for decades.
While critics conceded that the new proposal narrows the use and collection of personal information, they contended that it appears to expand the potential applications of CAPPS II.
David L. Sobel, general counsel at the Electronic Privacy Information Center, said he worries that CAPPS II will become a "massive enforcement mechanism."
"It opens the door for invasive background checks on all citizens," Sobel said.
James X. Dempsey, executive director of the Center for Democracy and Technology, said the change shows that officials will be always be tempted to expand the program's reach. "The system hasn't even been launched yet, and they're already thinking up other uses for it," he said.
Transportation Security Administration officials declined to comment on the proposal.
Homeland Security officials believe they have struck a balance between the protection of airplanes and the privacy rights of individuals. The system will be tested this summer and could be phased in beginning in the fall.
Nuala O'Connor Kelly, the agency's privacy officer, said the proposal is a significant improvement over previous plans because it limits the amount of information the government collects. The proposal would also give people a way to access records when questions arise about them.
"We have demonstrated we can both zealously defend the country and at the same time respect the liberties of the individual," Kelly said.
* * *
© 2003 The Washington Post Company
This is a CIR-assisted report. On leave from The Washington Post, O'Harrow is presently receiving support from CIR for his investigation of post-September 11 government surveillance, which will result in a book to be published by Free Press in 2004.
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.
Clark, a Democrat who declared himself a presidential candidate 10 days ago, joined Acxiom's board of directors in December 2001. He earned $300,000 from Acxiom last year and was set to receive $150,000, plus potential commissions, this year, according to financial disclosure records. He owns several thousand shares of Acxiom stock worth more than $67,000.
Clark's consulting role at Acxiom puts him near the center of a national debate over expanded government authority to use personal data and surveillance technology to fight the war on terrorism and protect homeland security.
In a measure of the intensity of that debate, Congress this week cut funding to the Defense Department's Information Awareness Office, a research project run by retired Adm. John M. Poindexter, after the office proposed a global data surveillance system to identify terrorists before they attack.
Recent news about the sharing of passenger information by JetBlue Airways Corp. with an Army contractor also raised privacy concerns. Acxiom helped provide data to that project, but Clark had no role in making the arrangements, the company said.
"The privacy impact of anti-terrorism initiatives is certain to be a major issue in the presidential campaign," said David L. Sobel, general counsel at the Electronic Privacy Information Center, an advocacy group in the District.
"The public is extremely skeptical," he said. "He owes the public an explanation as to how, if elected, he would limit the government's expanding collection of personal information about citizens."
Others believe that Clark faces skepticism about the money he took to represent Acxiom, even though many former military leaders have done the same thing.
"There's something unseemly and, yes, mercenary, about a distinguished general lobbying for a company trying to get government contracts," said Charles Lewis, executive director for the Center for Public Integrity.
Clark declined repeated requests in recent weeks to discuss the lobbying and his thoughts on information policy. After announcing his presidential ambitions, Clark quit working as a consultant for Acxiom but maintained his seat on the company's board.
As a consultant, he helped the company win a government contract worth an undisclosed amount to provide data and consulting services to the CAPPS II program. CAPPS II is the second-generation computer-assisted passenger screening system, a network that Transportation Secretary Norman Y. Mineta once described as "the foundation" on which all other, far more public aviation security measures depend.
A senior executive at Acxiom said Clark began knocking on doors for the company, without pay, out of patriotic impulses shortly after the Sept. 11 attacks. Jerry Jones, Acxiom's general counsel and business development leader, said the company also wanted to do its part in the war on terrorism.
Acxiom is a data integrator that manages billions of records for some of the nation's top banks, retailers and marketers. The company said it has "the largest collection of U.S. consumer and telephone data available in one source" -- data that is used in part to enhance others' records and authenticate identities.
"We reached out to him as someone who might get the attention in Washington of our capabilities," Jones said. "He was looking for ways to help make the country safer and more secure."
After joining the company's board in December 2001, Clark quickly arranged for executives to talk with officials at FinCEN, a Treasury Department agency responsible for financial intelligence and initiatives to combat money-laundering.
Clark also has met on the company's behalf with officials at the Department of Justice, the CIA, the Department of Transportation, the Transportation Security Administration and Lockheed Martin Corp., the defense contractor that is heading up CAPPS II.
Government and industry officials who have attended meetings with Clark described him as thoughtful and persuasive. Jones, the Acxiom official, said Clark repeatedly stressed the need to "properly balance legitimate privacy interests and the need for security." Jones said that was a core theme of Acxiom's effort to win government contracts.
In a meeting at the Department of Transportation in January 2002, according to participants, Clark described a system that would combine personal data from Acxiom with information about the reservations and seating records of every U.S. airline passenger.
With officials from an Acxiom partner sitting nearby, he explained that computers would examine the data -- massive amounts of information about housing, telephone numbers, car ownership and the like -- for subtle signs of terrorist intentions. The system would authenticate the identity of every passenger, he told the government officials at the meeting.
Implementation of CAPPS II has been delayed several times because of a mix of technological hurdles and concerns about its potential intrusiveness.
* * *
© 2003 The Washington Post Company
This is a CIR-assisted report. O'Harrow is presently receiving support from CIR for his investigation of post-September 11 government surveillance, which will result in a book to be published by Free Press in 2004.
Note: This story is based in part on reporting by O?Harrow for his forthcoming book, to be published in January by Free Press and supported by the Center for Investigative Reporting.
One day in January 2003, an entrepreneur from Florida named Hank Asher walked into the Roosevelt Room of the White House to demonstrate a counterterrorism tool he invented after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. Soon to be called Matrix, it was a computer program capable of examining records of billions of people in seconds.
Accompanied by Florida Gov. Jeb Bush and the state's top police official, Asher showed his creation to Vice President Cheney, FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III and Tom Ridge, who was about to be sworn in as secretary of the new Department of Homeland Security, according to people at the meeting.
The demonstration startled everyone in the room who had not seen it before. Almost as quickly as questions could be asked, the system generated long reports on a projection screen: names, addresses, driver license photos, links to associates, even ethnicity. At one point, an Asher associate recalled, Ridge turned toward Cheney and nudged him with an elbow, apparently to underscore his amazement at the power of what they were seeing. A few months later, Ridge approved an $8 million "cooperative agreement" from his department to help states link to the computer system.
In No Place to Hide, award-winning Washington Post reporter Robert O'Harrow, Jr., lays out in unnerving detail the post-9/11 marriage of private data and technology companies and government anti-terror initiatives to create something entirely new: a security-industrial complex. Drawing on his years of investigation, O'Harrow shows how the government now depends on burgeoning private reservoirs of information about almost every aspect of our lives to promote homeland security and fight the war on terror.
Consider the following: When you use your cell phone, the phone company knows where you are and when. If you use a discount card, your grocery and prescription purchases are recorded, profiled, and analyzed. Many new cars have built-in devices that enable companies to track from afar details about your movements. Software and information companies can even generate graphical link-analysis charts illustrating exactly how each person in a room is related to every other -- through jobs, roommates, family, and the like. Almost anyone can buy a dossier on you, including almost everything it takes to commit identity theft, for less than fifty dollars.
It may sound like science fiction, but it's the routine activity of the nation's fast-growing information industry and, more and more, its new partner the U.S. government.
With unrivaled access, O'Harrow tells the inside stories of key players in this new world, from software inventors to counterintelligence officials. He reveals how the government is creating a national intelligence infrastructure with the help of private companies. And he examines the impact of this new security system on our traditional notions of civil liberties, autonomy, and privacy, and the ways it threatens to undermine some of our society's most cherished values, even while offering us a sense of security. This eye-opening examination takes readers behind the walls of secrecy and shows how we are rushing toward a surveillance society with few rules to guide and protect us. In this new world of high-tech domestic intelligence, there is literally no place to hide.
This unique multimedia investigation uncovers in unnerving detail the post-9/11 marriage of private data services and government anti-terror initiatives. Led by Robert O’Harrow, Jr., award-winning reporter for The Washington Post and an associate of CIR, “No Place to Hide” shows how the government now depends on burgeoning private reservoirs of information about almost every aspect of our lives to protect homeland security and fight the war on terror.
With unrivaled access, “No Place to Hide” tells the inside stories of key players in this new world – from software inventors to counterintelligence officials – and examines the impact of the new security system on our traditional notions of civil liberties, autonomy and privacy. This eye-opening examination takes readers, viewers and listeners behind the walls of secrecy to show how we are rushing towards a surveillance society with few rules to guide and protect us. In this new world of high-tech domestic intelligence, there is literally no place to hide.
* * *
READ No Place to Hide, by Robert O’Harrow, Jr., published by Free Press (division of Simon & Schuster). Available now in paperback.
LISTEN to “No Place to Hide,” produced by John Biewen and Robert O’Harrow for American RadioWorks. Begins airing on public radio stations Wednesday, Jan. 12th.
WATCH "Peter Jennings Reporting: No Place to Hide," produced by Peter Bull for PJ Productions. Airs on ABC at 10 p.m., Thursday, Jan. 20th. Buy a copy of the documentary.
VISIT the “No Place to Hide” web site to:
This project was made possible in part by support to the Center for Investigative Reporting from the Ford Foundation, Deer Creek Foundation, Carnegie Corporation of New York, and the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation.
