backtop


Print E-mail del.icio.us 99 comment(s) - last by Lambsbreath.. on Aug 25 at 11:58 PM

Terrorist database victim of "mission creep," stored data on protest groups

Facing increased criticism for "mission creep" and inappropriate data entry, the Threat and Local Observation Notices (TALON) database maintained by the U.S. Department of Defense will be shut down on September 17, 2007.

Created in the aftermath of 9/11, the database was originally created to gather intelligence on possible threats to U.S. defense operations, both stateside and overseas. However, over its lifetime, TALON’s scope expanded considerably, eventually finding use for purposes far beyond its original mission. TALON’s out of control nature was aided by unverified reporting, data which grew to include peaceful domestic protest groups, nosy tourists and "Be on the Look Out" (BOLO) reports used by law enforcement

In a series of Freedom of Information Act requests made in February 2006, the ACLU found that TALON was used by the highly-secretive Counterintelligence Field Activity Agency (CIFA) to accumulate information and surveillance on nearly four dozen peaceful war protests. One February 2005 TALON report, centered on the War Resisters League’s protests near New York City recruiting stations, described the WRL as using "Ghandian nonviolence." In 2006, Newsweekpublished news of a TALON report used to store information on peace activists wearing papier-mâché masks and handing out peanut-butter-and-jelly sandwiches to Halliburton employees as they got off work.

Late last June, the Department of Defense Inspector General issued a damning evaluation (PDF) of TALON in response to audit requests from congress and previous negative press. While data used in TALON was collected legally, the report said, 1,131 of the 13,000 reports were found to be irrelevant to terrorism and subsequently purged. Additionally, it also found that the database did not consistently follow its 90-day retention review policy as set by the U.S. Department of Defense.

According to Pentagon spokesman and Army Colonel Gary Keck, TALON was determined to no longer hold analytical value, as reports coming into to the system had declined significantly.

TALON’s closure does not mark the end of the government’s data collection efforts. The DoD reported that they will retain the database for "intelligence oversight requirements" and that work has begun on a newer, improved system to take TALON’s place. In the interim, all of TALON’s remaining data will be moved to the FBI’s Guardian database, says Keck.


Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

THE PATRIOT ACT
By Vanilla Thunder on 8/23/2007 3:05:09 PM , Rating: 1
I can't believe any well informed, intelligent citizen would support a bill that strips you of almost all of your constitutional rights and freedoms. Whether or not you have anything to hide is not the point. Have you ever heard the saying "give 'em an inch and they'll take a mile"? When the gov't sees that they can pass this off on "unconscious America" with promises of safety, and well being, it's only a matter of time until they take more and more of our rights away in the name of "safety and patriotism". I love my country, but I love it because of the freedom I have. With each bit of that we lose, we lose a piece of the foundation that this country was founded on.

Vanilla




RE: THE PATRIOT ACT
By mdogs444 on 8/23/07, Rating: 0
RE: THE PATRIOT ACT
By Vanilla Thunder on 8/23/07, Rating: 0
RE: THE PATRIOT ACT
By mdogs444 on 8/23/2007 3:42:37 PM , Rating: 2
No, my apologies if you think it was directed at you. I was just venting towards alot of posts in here that are inferring that "this way is the only way" type of attitude.

Just that people rate me way down for my political views that they dont agree with. I dont tell anyone they are wrong, because freedom is being able to have your own mind and own views.

Again, my apologies if it seemed directed at you as it was in no way my intention.


RE: THE PATRIOT ACT
By Vanilla Thunder on 8/23/2007 3:56:00 PM , Rating: 2
Thanks. I appreciate the clarification. Personally, whether I agree or disagree with someone's opinion, I respect the fact that they're willing to speak their mind and argue their point passionately. Otherwise, what fun would this forum be? =)

Vanilla


RE: THE PATRIOT ACT
By TomZ on 8/23/2007 4:13:51 PM , Rating: 5
Sorry to interrupt your love-fest, but we're trying to have a serious discussion here. (clears throat) :o)


RE: THE PATRIOT ACT
By mdogs444 on 8/23/2007 4:15:50 PM , Rating: 2
Threes a crowd ;-)


RE: THE PATRIOT ACT
By Vanilla Thunder on 8/23/07, Rating: 0
RE: THE PATRIOT ACT
By glitchc on 8/23/2007 5:50:52 PM , Rating: 1
Ewww. Please keep such activities restricted to your respective bedrooms, whichever's it happens to be that night. ;)


RE: THE PATRIOT ACT
By Vanilla Thunder on 8/24/07, Rating: 0
RE: THE PATRIOT ACT
By TomZ on 8/24/2007 1:19:52 PM , Rating: 2
LOL... Actually I think it was those who lack any kind of sense of humor!


RE: THE PATRIOT ACT
By Vanilla Thunder on 8/24/2007 5:28:30 PM , Rating: 3
Wouldn't the right wing homophobes fall into that category? =)

Vanilla


RE: THE PATRIOT ACT
By Ringold on 8/23/2007 4:29:49 PM , Rating: 2
I would counter that you'd be hard pressed to find a President of the United States who didn't have their equivalent of the Patriot Act -- if not significantly worse in many situations, both in their violation of the constitution and the way in which they were implemented. This, at least, has been approved by Congress; that's an improvement from past events.

quote:
...that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom, and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

-Lincoln

All of which was both ironic and clairvoyant. Ironic in that as he uttered those words he wielded dictatorial power, and clairvoyant in that he knew that to save the Constitution he must temporarily abandon it -- in full knowledge (or hope) that after the turmoil of the Civil War had passed that his federal powers would be rolled back, unconstitutional laws revoked, and all other damage undone -- which essentially is what happened.

That'll be the real test; after Islamic fascism is thoroughly cleansed, will we then roll back the encroachment of federal authority with the same zeal as occured after the Civil War? If the Cold War is any indication we probably will not.. but regardless, the Patriot Act is far from unprecedented; it'd almost be unusual in American history if we didn't have something along it's lines, given the scope of the conflict being on a similar scale to that of the past few major conflicts which had such violations of their own.

Let's not so easily forget our history, folks. We've been here before; some of the details have changed, but the idea hasn't, and we'll be here again. With troops still abroad and terrorists gaining strength by the day we're no where near the point where we have the leisure to kick back and start getting in the way of the war effort -- especially one so reliant on intelligence.


RE: THE PATRIOT ACT
By Vanilla Thunder on 8/23/2007 4:43:41 PM , Rating: 2
I think there is validity to your point. However, I'm not quite sure we could compare the actions of a president of a country torn apart by civil war to the situation with George W. and his crusade in the middle east.

quote:
I would counter that you'd be hard pressed to find a President of the United States who didn't have their equivalent of the Patriot Act


I'm not saying you're a liar...but I would like examples to support this opinion. Also, you make it seem as if these equivalents were "secrets" and the Patriot Act is congressionally approved, which makes it better. I pose this question. Doesn't knowing about it and accepting it make it worse?

Vanilla


RE: THE PATRIOT ACT
By Ringold on 8/23/2007 5:15:13 PM , Rating: 5
I'd call knowing about it and accepting it in the short term to be enlightened in that people would understand history and know that complete liberty and security aren't always compatible.

As far as Lincoln goes, I think you underestimate how similar the domestic situation was in the North. Copperheads, or suspected ones, could be actual Southern officers sent to engage in sabotage or merely Republican's who disagreed with Lincoln acting entirely of their own volition. Lincoln suppressed them, and any political opposition that grew too powerful, brutally.

Other examples.

Roosevelt -- a little Google and you'll find a list of transgressions a mile long. I'm aware of little dissent to the idea he was functionally a benevolent dictator.

Woodrow Wilson: Feel free to Google the Espionage Act of 1917, the Sedition Act of 1918, and Palmer Raids. He had little more problem throwing journalists in jail than did Lincoln.

President Truman and Eisenhower both used various means to sidestep Congressional authority, particularly Truman as it relates to Korea and the random seizure of steel mills. It's hard to pin anything too solid on Cold War presidents but some of their dirty work was being done by rabid anti-communist movements outside the Oval Office.

As far as the government misleading people on the status of the war.. I've not actually looked too close at Vietnam, at least from that angle, so can't comment, but it seems the opinion of many that deception did take place, and I know it's the opinion of the military that they lost essentially because they couldn't hide their losses well enough.

It's a little tough to cherry-pick examples before Lincoln as the Civil War represents the countries first existential crisis (asides from, of course, the original one). Laws based on racism and fear of foreigners were passed prior to Lincoln, but I can't pin that on war.

The first Gulf War is a happy exception -- but it also was one of the more honest, straight-forward conflicts that needed no such suppression.

Oh! And the USS Maine struck a mine. Mmmhmmm... But hey, whatever whips the people in to a frenzy so we can get some new real-estate.

If anything else pops in to mind (I just covered WW1, WW2, Korea, the Civil War and Vietnam -- I dont think I'm missing anything significant) I'll post again. I might've drifted off course with the USS Maine as far as the Patriot Act.. but the rest I think were on target. Lincoln, Wilson, Roosevelt and a whole line of Cold War presidents suffering from lack of honesty seem a pretty solid precedent, though it'd be nice to support my thesis if we'd rolled back federal power after the collapse of the Soviet Union..


RE: THE PATRIOT ACT
By Vanilla Thunder on 8/23/2007 5:21:46 PM , Rating: 2
Well thought and well spoken. That said, I still don't support the Patriot Act, or believe that we will see federal power rolled back in the near future. Just my opinion. Let's hope I'm wrong.

Vanilla


RE: THE PATRIOT ACT
By Ringold on 8/23/2007 9:20:31 PM , Rating: 3
I *think* the Patriot Act has a sunset built in to it..

Though, to be fair and honest, the further strengthening of the precedent can be as damaging as the law itself even once the law is gone. We'd of never got the New Deal without the 'Progressive Era' of the early 1900s, which drew it's own credibility from the Civil War Reconstruction period.

I think we generally agree. While I didn't see anything too sinister about it, we're both cynical as to the ultimate outcome. Maybe I'll join the group hug? ;)


RE: THE PATRIOT ACT
By masher2 (blog) on 8/23/2007 5:29:16 PM , Rating: 5
> "I can't believe any well informed, intelligent citizen would support a bill that strips you of almost all of your constitutional rights and freedoms"

I don't support the Patriot Act either. However, relatively, it has only a small impact on our Fourth and Fifth Amendment rights. I find it incredibly sad that those campaigning so loudly against it are prepared to ignore far larger governmental intrusions in the areas of our First, Second, Ninth, and Tenth Amendment rights.

ALL the rights enumerated in the Constitution are important. Why not protect them all, instead of picking and choosing?