Protestors Demand End To Pentagon Database

[Roadtoad]

Personally, I have nothing against the Pentagon trying to market the military to young people. From what I'm reading, this is too much. You cannot tell me this information cannot be misused. Their track record tells us so.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=58851

By JOHN J. LUMPKIN, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - Privacy advocates are objecting to the Pentagon's use of a database with files on millions of young people that the military says it needs for recruiting to help fill its ranks.

...snip...

Parents or students 18 and over can "opt out" with a written request. Critics have challenged the measure on privacy grounds; others say it provides the military an unfair opportunity for the military to sway young minds.

Edited by Darat: 

Edited for breach of Rule 4.

 

[crimresearch]

"The military obtains this information from several sources: individuals who volunteer it, state motor vehicle departments, commercial information brokers and the Selective Service system. The records are supposed to be destroyed five years after they are gathered, the military says.

Military officials said they have about 30 million names in this database. Chu said the services have been required by law to keep such information for recruiting purposes for at least 23 years.

Chu said later that the Social Security number is scrambled before it enters the database so it remains a unique number useful to identify an individual, but not that person's actual Social Security number."

So it is OK for Pepsi or Nike to maintain this info, but not OK for the 'commercial information brokers' to sell it to the Pentagon?

Even though the law has required the military to have such records for a quarter of a century?

My sister sent the name of her dog... (let's call it 'Rico', to protect doggie privacy)....
in to some marketing thing many years ago as a joke.

When the dog would have been 17 - 18, military recruiting junk mail started showing up at the house in the name of 'Rico Hernandez'...a few years later, 'Rico' was getting targeted mailings for online diploma mills and low cost health insurance, since there was no public record of a 'Rico Hernandez' ever graduating from school, or being in the military or jail.

I'm sure we will be seeing mail for Rico H. that is demographic appropriate for quite some time, as computers do their stuff.

 

[Roadtoad]

"The military obtains this information from several sources: individuals who volunteer it, state motor vehicle departments, commercial information brokers and the Selective Service system. The records are supposed to be destroyed five years after they are gathered, the military says.

Military officials said they have about 30 million names in this database. Chu said the services have been required by law to keep such information for recruiting purposes for at least 23 years.

Chu said later that the Social Security number is scrambled before it enters the database so it remains a unique number useful to identify an individual, but not that person's actual Social Security number."

So it is OK for Pepsi or Nike to maintain this info, but not OK for the 'commercial information brokers' to sell it to the Pentagon?

Even though the law has required the military to have such records for a quarter of a century?

My sister sent the name of her dog... (let's call it 'Rico', to protect doggie privacy)....
in to some marketing thing many years ago as a joke.

When the dog would have been 17 - 18, military recruiting junk mail started showing up at the house in the name of 'Rico Hernandez'...a few years later, 'Rico' was getting targeted mailings for online diploma mills and low cost health insurance, since there was no public record of a 'Rico Hernandez' ever graduating from school, or being in the military or jail.

I'm sure we will be seeing mail for Rico H. that is demographic appropriate for quite some time, as computers do their stuff.

Crim, I don't even want Nike or Pepsi to have this information. It's been misused in the past, and I don't want it misused again.

(Although, I like that idea, inputting the name of your sister's dog into the computers. I might just try that the next time I buy anything from the Home Depot.)

 

[Roadtoad]

And, BTW: Considering registration for Selective Service is mandatory, why does this information need to be gathered from other sources, and why is an outside company being used for this purpose? This is one time when our tax dollars need to be used to keep this sort of thing "in house."

 

[Ed]

And, BTW: Considering registration for Selective Service is mandatory, why does this information need to be gathered from other sources, and why is an outside company being used for this purpose? This is one time when our tax dollars need to be used to keep this sort of thing "in house."

I am somewhat familiar with the general area of data mining. I would be very surprised if this is not and has not been going on for a decade or more. What do you think NSA is actually collecting?

 

[Roadtoad]

This is what concerns me. Did you realize, for example, that if you ask the FBI if there's a file on you, the open a file? How paranoid can you get!

 

[Ed]

This is what concerns me. Did you realize, for example, that if you ask the FBI if there's a file on you, the open a file? How paranoid can you get!

Process.

Suppose AUP asks. A year later there is a Senate hearing. AUP asks what happened to his request. The FBI says "dunno". AUP waves his documents around again prooving that there is evil in the US.

Better to open the file.

Edited by Darat: 

As per my announcement this is a borderline post, it needlessly brings a negative personal opinion about another Member into the thread.

 

[corplinx]

I want the IRS to also stop collecting my information. Not only do they have my SS, they also have my employer's name, how much I make, how much I give to charity, how much I win at blackjack, how much my property taxes are, my marital status, my stock market losses, you get the idea.

This is just anti-military leftists riding a red herring to try to draw popular support under a shield of ignorance.

Holy Crap! The government has the ID number they issued me!

 

[aerocontrols]

I want the IRS to also stop collecting my information. Not only do they have my SS, they also have my employer's name, how much I make, how much I give to charity, how much I win at blackjack, how much my property taxes are, my marital status, my stock market losses, you get the idea.

You betcha.

The Internal Revenue Service is investigating whether unauthorized people gained access to sensitive taxpayer and bank account information but has not yet exposed any privacy breaches, an official said on Friday.

The U.S. tax agency -- whose databases include suspicious activity reports from banks about possible terrorist or criminal transactions -- launched the probe after the Government Accountability Office said in April that the IRS "routinely permitted excessive access" to the computer files.

 

[Tony]

I want the IRS to also stop collecting my information. Not only do they have my SS, they also have my employer's name, how much I make, how much I give to charity, how much I win at blackjack, how much my property taxes are, my marital status, my stock market losses, you get the idea.

This is just anti-military leftists riding a red herring to try to draw popular support under a shield of ignorance.

Holy Crap! The government has the ID number they issued me!

What a stupid post. Since the IRS criminal enterprise has the power to force you to surrender information, the military should be allowed to do the same?

 

[Checkmite]

This is what concerns me. Did you realize, for example, that if you ask the FBI if there's a file on you, the open a file? How paranoid can you get!

File Entry 0001: Subject telephoned FBI office at 1347H on 02122005 to ask if FBI had a file for his name.

---End of File---

Oh my ever-◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ GOD, how nefarious!!! Next thing you know, they'll be searching through my public criminal record!

 

[Chaos]

Process.

Suppose AUP asks. A year later there is a Senate hearing. AUP asks what happened to his request. The FBI says "dunno". AUP waves his documents around again prooving that there is evil in the US.

Better to open the file.

This personal attack was unprovoked, uncalled-for, and utterly un-helpful for this debate.

I suggest that you shut down your computer and get a life instead of posting crap like this.

Edited by Darat: 

As per my announcement - this post is inappropriate for this section of the forum. If you believe a Member has made a post that breaches their Membership Agreement please use the "Report" feature or contact a Member of the Moderating Team.

 

[Manny]

Since the IRS criminal enterprise...

Ooh, I'm telling the black helicopters on you! You just watch, those Wal*Mart trucks with the "Martial Law" signs will be by any day now.

 

[corplinx]

What a stupid post. Since the IRS criminal enterprise has the power to force you to surrender information, the military should be allowed to do the same?

The information the government already has on me is a serious invasion of privacy. One branch of the government (the pentagon) has a much smaller subset of the data. I fail to see the controversy here.

 

[Tony]

The information the government already has on me is a serious invasion of privacy.

Ok.

One branch of the government (the pentagon) has a much smaller subset of the data.

When did the pentagon become a branch of government?

I fail to see the controversy here.

Huh? Did you just not say:

The information the government already has on me is a serious invasion of privacy.

It would appear that you have full grasp of the controversy. It would also appear that you are apologizing for the pentagon/military.

 

[Luke T.]

Personally, I have nothing against the Pentagon trying to market the military to young people. From what I'm reading, this is too much. You cannot tell me this information cannot be misused. Their track record tells us so.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=58851

By JOHN J. LUMPKIN, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - Privacy advocates are objecting to the Pentagon's use of a database with files on millions of young people that the military says it needs for recruiting to help fill its ranks.

...snip...

Parents or students 18 and over can "opt out" with a written request. Critics have challenged the measure on privacy grounds; others say it provides the military an unfair opportunity for the military to sway young minds.

Edited by Darat: 

Edited for breach of Rule 4.

Heh. The link in your post is to this topic. ???

Here is a link to the news story, seeing as how we are worried about Rule 4 and all...

LINK

 

[Ed]

This personal attack was unprovoked, uncalled-for, and utterly un-helpful for this debate.

I suggest that you shut down your computer and get a life instead of posting crap like this.

Edited by Darat: 

As per my announcement - this post is inappropriate for this section of the forum. If you believe a Member has made a post that breaches their Membership Agreement please use the "Report" feature or contact a Member of the Moderating Team.

In other words, tattle. Cool.

BTW, the definition of being here is not having a life. This is like a never ending cocktail party. Whould you characterize someone who did that daily as "having a life"?

 

[Roadtoad]

First, I don't go along with personal attacks. They're a waste of time.

Second, as far as the IRS is concerned, the ONLY thing they ought to be concerned with revenue. Whether I'm married or not, what I do for a living, any of that, is extranneous, and none of their frigging business.

Further, I still think we'd be better off with a flat tax, kept as low as possible, (if we're going to go with an income tax), and frankly, I'd just as soon see it brought to an end. I realize the world has become a more complicated place, but that's no excuse for creating huge bureaucracies to keep incumbents in power, because that's why they do it. Serving the public has damned little to do with it.

 

[Manny]

Second, as far as the IRS is concerned, the ONLY thing they ought to be concerned with revenue. Whether I'm married or not, what I do for a living, any of that, is extranneous, and none of their frigging business.

Hee. The IRS is SMRT. All you really have to tell them is about your revenue. All that other stuff, like being married, having expenses that offset some of the revenue, etc. is stuff they convince you that you want to tell them on accout of it lowers your tax bill. If you're a married person with two kids and a mortgage who lost $5,000 in Vegas and won $10,000 in Atlantic City and had $50,000 in capital losses and $25,000 in capital gains you can tell them if you really, really want that you're a single guy who won ten large in AC and made $25,000 in the market in addition to your salary. It will hurt like hell to do it, but they won't do anything to you except cash your check and disallow the $4K deduction for your joint IRA.

Don't know about the "occupation" thing. I don't think they use it for anything but statistical purposes unless your return is way out of whack. I suppose if you report $3 MM in gambling earnings and $2,975,000 in gambling losses they'll want to see "gambler" down on that line so the guy reading it has an "aha" moment. But I don't think they, for example, read "insurance adjustor" and audit you if your earnings are outside their range for that profession.