Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Identity Dominance: the US Military's Biometric War In Afghanistan

timothy posted about 5 months ago | from the just-want-to-borrow-your-eyeball dept.

Government 83

Advocatus Diaboli (1627651) writes "For years the U.S. military has been waging a biometric war in Afghanistan, working to unravel the insurgent networks operating throughout the country by collecting the personal identifiers of large portions of the population. A restricted U.S. Army guide on the use of biometrics in Afghanistan obtained by Public Intelligence provides an inside look at this ongoing battle to identify the Afghan people."

cancel ×

83 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Neocons (-1, Flamebait)

benjfowler (239527) | about 5 months ago | (#46840941)

The neoconservatives know better than to let a perfectly good crisis go to waste, as we've seen in Latin America, Iraq and elsewhere. Never mind that the results ALWAYS turn to shit... but it never stops them from trying nonetheless.

The world is being run by idiots.

Does that make Obama a "neocon"? (2, Informative)

xxxJonBoyxxx (565205) | about 5 months ago | (#46841007)

>> The neoconservatives know better than to let a perfectly good crisis go to waste

Does that make Obama a "neocon"? (If he really wanted us out of those places, he'd have done it by now.)

BTW, the "never let a good crisis go to waste" quote is frequently attributed to Obama's former chief of staff and long-time Chicago associate Rahm Emanuel:
http://www.brainyquote.com/quo... [brainyquote.com]

Re:Does that make Obama a "neocon"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46841069)

Does that make Obama a "neocon"?

Yes.

Re:Does that make Obama a "neocon"? (1)

HornWumpus (783565) | about 5 months ago | (#46845107)

That's fair, considering Bush II was a liberal.

Re:Does that make Obama a "neocon"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46841091)

He absolutely is. The left got scammed hard. Obama is exceptionally right of center practically everywhere that it counts. In every domain except public relations he's easily in the same league as Bush Jr. and has more or less directly continued his policies, from education to foreign relations. For all intents and purposes that disaster of a presidency never ended.

He's also well to the right of most republicans from forty years ago, but there again, so are most democrats today - and practically all republicans now.

Neoconservatism definitely won the war of ideas in Washington and I'm not entirely sure what to attribute that to, other than our slow but steady rightward march.

Beta Sucks (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46841475)

"The left got scammed hard. Obama is exceptionally right of center practically everywhere that it counts."

You're one of those wackos who claim Stalin was 'right wing', aren't you?

Most of the original neo-cons were Trots who realized they were on the losing side, and switched to the 'right' without changing one iota of their beliefs. How can you possibly claim with a straight face that they, or Obama, are on the same side of politics as Ron Paul?

Re:Does that make Obama a "neocon"? (2, Insightful)

ShakaUVM (157947) | about 5 months ago | (#46841637)

>He's also well to the right of most republicans from forty years ago, but there again, so are most democrats today - and practically all republicans now.

Let's test this thesis of yours. With an actual test.

Who said this?

1) "Today, we need a nation of Minutemen, citizens who are not only prepared to take arms, but citizens who regard the preservation of freedom as the basic purpose of their daily life and who are willing to consciously work and sacrifice for that freedom."

Was it: A) Cliven Bundy, B) John F. Kennedy, C) Rush Limbaugh, or D) Ted Nugent?

2) "Certainly one of the chief guarantees of freedom under any government, no matter how popular and respected, is the right of the citizens to keep and bear arms. [...] the right of the citizens to bear arms is just one guarantee against arbitrary government and one more safeguard against a tyranny which now appears remote in America, but which historically has proved to be always possible."

Was it: A) Obama, B) Hubert Humphrey, C) Ronald Reagan, or D) The Tea Party?

3) "Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable."

Was it: A) Antonin Scalia, B) John F. Kennedy, C) Che Guevara, or D) Al Gore?

Ok, that might have been too easy. How about this one:

4) "The people of the United States should be forbidden to have in their possession any firearms, or any other type of weapon. The possession of weapons can make it difficult to collect taxes and dues and supports rebellion."

Was it: A) FDR, B) Al Gore, C) Truman, or D) Harry Reid?

If you want to cheat, these quotes can be found here: http://catb.org/~esr/guns/quot... [catb.org]

But more importantly, think about your thought processes as you try to answer them. Nobody would seriously think that Obama would ever in a thousand years say something like #2 (in fact, if you didn't laugh at that option, you probably don't have much of a sense of humor). But we'd seriously have to consider if it was Al Gore or Harry Reid that said that, since, again, the older Democrats were far to the right of the modern party.

JFK fought with Nixon in the debates over who was more anti-communist, and LBJ had that whole Vietnam thing. Modern Democrats are far, far to the left of the older Democrat party on most issues. Read LBJ talk about how the federal government shouldn't be in the business of law enforcement some time, and then contrast that against Harry Reid calling in snipers to try to push Cliven Bundy off his ranch.

Re:Does that make Obama a "neocon"? (2)

Shakrai (717556) | about 5 months ago | (#46842521)

and then contrast that against Harry Reid calling in snipers to try to push Cliven Bundy off his ranch.

They aren't trying to push him off his ranch, they're trying to enforce a valid court order that says he can't graze his cattle on BLM managed lands without paying the appropriate fees. Whatever else you think about Federal land management policy (I think it's absurd Uncle Sam owns >80% of Nevada, but that's another discussion) you can't allow someone to so brazenly flaunt lawful judicial orders.

Armed citizens interfering with the enforcement of court orders, in a matter regarding the collection of monies owed to the Federal Government that have been confirmed by multiple courts of contempt jurisdiction after the debtor received due process of law? That's completely unacceptable. Do they really want to play the game by 18th Century rules? Uncle Sam should call their bluff and send in a Federalized militia [wikipedia.org] to enforce the lawful orders of the Federal Judiciary.

Re:Does that make Obama a "neocon"? (1)

jasonrice22 (3458571) | about 5 months ago | (#46842711)

Avoiding a blood bath over a cattle grazing dispute seems reasonable.

Re:Does that make Obama a "neocon"? (1)

Shakrai (717556) | about 5 months ago | (#46843009)

Setting the precedent that you can flaunt Federal Court Orders with threats of violence will cause far more bloodshed than enforcing this order in the here and now.

Re:Does that make Obama a "neocon"? (1)

jasonrice22 (3458571) | about 5 months ago | (#46848995)

This isn't just about a single person or an isolated incident. The BLM has been rubbing locals the wrong way in Nevada for some time now. This includes events that lead to the local sheriff (Tony DeMeo) threatening to arrest BLM agents for illegal search and seizures against his constituents. http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1289150 [rcgroups.com]

Re:Does that make Obama a "neocon"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46843145)

"... you can't allow someone to so brazenly flaunt lawful judicial orders. "

And yet we 'brazenly' allow MILLIONS of people to cross our borders ILLEGALLY and don't do a God Damn thing about it yet we are willing to waste what I'd bet was at least a million dollars 'enforcing' a court order on one of our own citizens... Please tell me someone else here sees the hypocrisy in this.

Re:Does that make Obama a "neocon"? (1)

Uberbah (647458) | about 5 months ago | (#46844295)

And yet we 'brazenly' allow MILLIONS of people to cross our borders ILLEGALLY and don't do a God Damn thing about it yet we are willing to waste what I'd bet was at least a million dollars 'enforcing' a court order on one of our own citizens... Please tell me someone else here sees the hypocrisy in this.

Okay, lets pretend for a minute that the descendants of white invaders hating on the descendants of native inhabitants isn't 1) racist 2) willfully ignorant of how the U.S. was formed 3) willfully ignorant of a century of American imperialism in Latin America. If some guy from down south lost his farm to NAFTA, lost his mom to a CIA-backed death squad, lost his dad to the U.S. backed right wing dictatorship that overthrew a democratic government....the least you can do is let the poor bastard work at a Wal-Mart in Toledo.

You still have a fail since Obama has dramatically increased deportations of immigrants over his Republican predecessor.

Re:Does that make Obama a "neocon"? (1)

Shakrai (717556) | about 5 months ago | (#46846545)

My question, which nobody in the mainstream asks, since the powers-that-be in each party are apparently in favor of some sort of amnesty provision: What do you tell the hundreds of thousands in line who are going through the process legally? Tough luck, you should have sneaked across the border/overstayed your visa and waited a few years?

I know people who have immigrated to the United States from Canada, the EU, Georgia, and Australia. It took most of them more than ten years to become naturalized citizens. Some are still waiting. Ask them what they think about the current "reform" debate that's exclusively centered on people who broke the law to get/stay here.

Re:Does that make Obama a "neocon"? (1)

Uberbah (647458) | about 5 months ago | (#46856207)

My question, which nobody in the mainstream asks, since the powers-that-be in each party are apparently in favor of some sort of amnesty provision: What do you tell the hundreds of thousands in line who are going through the process legally? Tough luck, you should have sneaked across the border/overstayed your visa and waited a few years?

How about....so what, we don't believe in crab mentality. [wikipedia.org]

Re:Does that make Obama a "neocon"? (1)

ShakaUVM (157947) | about 5 months ago | (#46846861)

>hey aren't trying to push him off his ranch, they're trying to enforce a valid court order that says he can't graze his cattle on BLM managed lands without paying the appropriate fees.

Fine, push him off "the grazing lands his family has been using since the 1800s", since he doesn't own it.

But that's not my point. Look at the attitudes expressed in those sentences, and then try to imagine Harry Reid saying them. With the exception of the 4th statement (which was said by Toyotomi Hideyoshi at the advent of the Sword Hunt) you can't.

There has been a serious and significant culture shift in the Democrat party since the 1960s. The claim that they have moved "to the right" is nonsensical, unless you equate right-wing to mean "anything I don't like" (which, to be fair, seems to be in the current parlance on here). If you look at Uberbah's idiotic response to me below, you'll see him claim that to him "right wing" means torture, unilateral military action, and not prosecuting bankers. Which, as I think we can all agree, has shit-all to actually do with the traditional left-right divide.

Re:Does that make Obama a "neocon"? (1)

Shakrai (717556) | about 5 months ago | (#46856201)

Harry Reid is an asshole. That's hardly news to me. What does it have to do with the price of tea in China though?

Re:Does that make Obama a "neocon"? (1)

jasonrice22 (3458571) | about 5 months ago | (#46842689)

4) "The people of the United States should be forbidden to have in their possession any firearms, or any other type of weapon. The possession of weapons can make it difficult to collect taxes and dues and supports rebellion."

Was it: A) FDR, B) Al Gore, C) Truman, or D) Harry Reid?

Toyotomi Hideyoshi was the closest one I could find for #4

Re:Does that make Obama a "neocon"? (1)

Uberbah (647458) | about 5 months ago | (#46844385)

Modern Democrats are far, far to the left of the older Democrat party on most issues.

When modern democrats are far, far to the right of Ronald Reagan, that's some pretty pathetic willful ignorance of history, with a sideshow of irrelevant quotes that have nothing to do with policy.

Reagan increased taxes to reduce the deficit while Obama continued Bush's budget busting tax cuts.

Reagan signed a treaty requiring the prosecution of those who commit torture, Obama grants them immunity.

Reagan pulled out of Lebanon, while Obama has made arrangements to continue the Afghanistan war through two terms of Obama's successor.

Reagan adamantly insisted that Social Security has nothing to do with the deficit, whereas Obama constantly tries to cut it.

Reagan never started a war without Congressional authorization, like Obama did with Libya and all the people he's bombing that the CIA doesn't even bother to claim have Al Qaeda ties.

Reagan started DOJ investigations that sent 800 banking executives to jail for the S&L crisis. Not only has Obama not prosecuted a single banker for a fraud 70 times as large as the S&L's, he spent billions of taxpayer money bailing them out.

Reagan didn't push a corporate trade treaty that would shred national sovereignty on regulation or consumer protection.

And that's Reagan, not the guy that started the EPA, proposed a national income, or expanded Social Security. You're so far off-base you're off-plant.

Re:Does that make Obama a "neocon"? (1)

ShakaUVM (157947) | about 5 months ago | (#46846843)

>Reagan increased taxes to reduce the deficit while Obama continued Bush's budget busting tax cuts.

Only someone with no understanding of history or current events would be so ignorant to make a statement like that.

Do you know what actually happened? Reagan negotiated with the Democrats to allow a tax increase in exchange for spending cuts. That never happened. Fast forward to the Fiscal Cliff debates, and the Democrats tried the exact same fucking tactic again, with the media floating the proposal to the public like it was the most reasonable thing in the world.

Obama pushed hard to raise taxes in a number of areas, which the Republicans agreed to in some areas, so taxes are now higher than they were under Bush.

>Reagan signed a treaty requiring the prosecution of those who commit torture, Obama grants them immunity.

Torture is not a right wing or left wing issue. It's a liberty vs. statism issue, and both Bush 2.0 and Obama are major statists.

If you would like to prove me wrong by finding contravening planks in the RNC and DNC platforms or talking points, go right ahead.

>Reagan pulled out of Lebanon, while Obama has made arrangements to continue the Afghanistan war through two terms of Obama's successor.

That's one of the dumbest cherry picks I've ever seen. Reagan invaded Grenada in Urgent Fury, and engaged in nation building there. He pulled the marines of Lebanon a couple months after the suicide bombing, and did so in order to launch artillery strikes and bombing runs on Lebanon, and also engaged in nation building.

>Reagan adamantly insisted that Social Security has nothing to do with the deficit, whereas Obama constantly tries to cut it.

Are you just talking about the changes to how inflation is calculated? If so, that's idiotic hyperbole.

>Reagan never started a war without Congressional authorization, like Obama did with Libya and all the people he's bombing that the CIA doesn't even bother to claim have Al Qaeda ties.

How is starting a war without an authorization a "right-wing" feature? Again, point to me the plank in the RNC platform that calls for unilateral military action.

>Reagan started DOJ investigations that sent 800 banking executives to jail for the S&L crisis. Not only has Obama not prosecuted a single banker for a fraud 70 times as large as the S&L's, he spent billions of taxpayer money bailing them out.

Ditto. None of the things you've mentioned make Obama right wing.

>When modern democrats are far, far to the right of Ronald Reagan, that's some pretty pathetic willful ignorance of history, with a sideshow of irrelevant quotes that have nothing to do with policy.

Actually, the quotes I provided are far more germane. It's laughable to even imagine Obama talking about guns being used to defend yourself from an encroachment of rights by the federal government (instead Obama says, "If you hear those voices, don't listen to them.")

There has been a very serious culture shift in the Democrat party since the 1960s, that resulted in them adopting the various socialist and statist views that reflected the ideological shift in the social sciences in our colleges.

Re:Does that make Obama a "neocon"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46842357)

Our last truly liberal president was... Richard Nixon.
He started the EPA, amongst a host of other things that today would be considered "liberal" values.
Obama, on the other hand, is much farther "right" than that, he has consistently appointed banker elites and corporate shills to head up government agencies, has started wars around the world, and is presiding over the ever increasing destruction of the middle class in this country.

If they can do that to the Afghans ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46841121)

... think of what they have done to the Americans !!

I mean, in Afghanistan the vast majority of the Afghans were / are of the NON-cooperative type.

There are many Afghans that the American troops never get to meet - because they live in far flung places, and many of them do their best to avoid any contact with the "infidels".

Under that kind of scenario if the Americans can still launch that "biometric" campaign, think of what they might have achieved with their own people - the Americans !!

If you guys think NSA's online surveillance was terrible, think of the "offline" stuffs the American government already have on their own "subjects".

Re:If they can do that to the Afghans ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46841417)

Are you saying when I go to get my driver's license that they are 'enrolling' me just like... oh...

No...neocons oppose Obama always (1)

globaljustin (574257) | about 5 months ago | (#46842759)

No. Obama is not a Neo-con...neo-cons criticize and oppose Obama at every point.

Also, other ways Obama is not a neo-con:

Obama is not anti-abortion

Obama is not in favor of teaching creationism in schools

Obama does not cut social services

Obama does not deny climate change & pollution

Obama does not shut down the government for no reason

Obama does not take away civil rights

Obama is virtually diametrically opposed to Neo-cons on every issue you can name

Re:No...neocons oppose Obama always (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46843405)

Obama does not shut down the government for no reason

The government shut down because he refused to talk to the GOP over delaying Obamacare. After the shutdown was over he single handedly put in every delay the GOP asked for. Therefore, Obama is the ONLY ONE who shut down the government for no reason.

Obama does not take away civil rights

He refuses to acknowledge the rights of citizens to run their own campaign ads within 90 days of an election.
He actively attempts to remove second amendment rights of citizens.
He kills US citizens without trial on foreign soil.
He gives Obamacare subsidies to Congress while private citizens making the same amount don't get them, 14th amendment.

Is your head in the sand?

Of course he's a neocon. (1)

Uberbah (647458) | about 5 months ago | (#46844247)

The only Cheneysque thing Obama hasn't continued and expanded is the torture program. Everything else, Obama has done bigger and better than his predecessor - more spying, more countries bombed, more executive privilege, more FOIA requests denied, more prosecutions of whisteblowers than all previous presidents combined times two.....

Also, other ways Obama is not a neo-con: Obama is not anti-abortion

That's part of the problem: you seem to have confused "neocon" with "Christian Right". The two are not remotely the same thing - not all homophobes have a hard-on for bombing Iran, and not all imperialists want to ban abortion. Case in point: Dick Cheney "evolved" on gay marriage almost 10 years before Obama made it cool.

.neo-cons criticize and oppose Obama at every point.

To do what right wingers always do: move the conversation to the right. Like on domestic policy: before the ACA was Obamacare, it was Romneycare, and before that Dolecare, and before that the Heritage Foundation plan. Yet the Republicans went and lost their minds once the Democrats adopted the 20 year old Republican plan as their own.

Re:Of course he's a neocon. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46844867)

The only Cheneysque thing Obama hasn't continued and expanded is the torture program. Everything else, Obama has done bigger and better than his predecessor - more spying, more countries bombed, more executive privilege, more FOIA requests denied, more prosecutions of whisteblowers than all previous presidents combined times two.....

Hell, you want to really piss people off just point out Obama is basically Bush's 3rd and 4th terms. (I'm always amazed by how people can hate one of these guys and love the other.)

"neocon" is w/e makes you seem right (1)

globaljustin (574257) | about 5 months ago | (#46846269)

you're being dishonest in this discussion

you're using a term "neocon" inconsistently and it's obvious by context that it was intentional

you = GOP troll

No. Neocon = American Imperialist (1)

Uberbah (647458) | about 5 months ago | (#46860707)

you're being dishonest in this discussion

You don't know WTF you're talking about. Neocons are all about extending the American Empire, not hating gays or banning abortions. This is remedial modern politics, here.

you = GOP troll

Yes, because sooooooooooooo many Republicans are angry with Obama's drone strikes, illegal invasions and support for coups against democratically elected governments for a lack of pro-west capitalism.

you = butthurt Obamabot reciting a script

neo-cons oppose Obama's policies (1)

globaljustin (574257) | about 5 months ago | (#46864813)

neo-cons are some of Obama's harshest, most intractable critics you fsking troll!

they *hate* his policies, foreign and domestic...this is the last post I will elucidate for you

Neocons are all about extending the American Empire, not hating gays or banning abortions.

and the religious right & tea party are their subordinates, ideologically and by policy...they are led around and do exactly what they are told

none of this changes the fact that Neo-cons oppose Obama nor does it "prove" you right somehow

Obama's drone strikes, illegal invasions and support for coups

only a GOP-troll "libertarian" would frame the argument around those bogus issues

"drone strikes" is a reductive concept...it's a missile on a jet...whether the pilot of it is in the cockpit or in a booth in California doesn't matter...it's a stupid, trolling criticism that no one credibly makes...it's rhetorical distraction...media bate...

"illegal invasions"...this is just made up out of thin air...

so no, your position doesn't make logical sense, your criticisms have been shown to be trolling-based...and you're just a dupe, stubborn, or something else I don't know

Re:Neocons (1)

mi (197448) | about 5 months ago | (#46842297)

Never mind that the results ALWAYS turn to shit...

Chile, where we succeeded, is Latin America's top economy — now and for the last twenty years or more. Cuba, where we failed, is a shithole. As is Venezuela, where we decided not to bother...

The world is being run by idiots.

This is true, unfortunately. And most of the idiots are wearing a Che Guevara T-shirt.

Re:Neocons (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46842583)

Game of Thrones teaches us the world is run by murderers.

parent is not "flamebait" (1)

globaljustin (574257) | about 5 months ago | (#46844091)

slashdot is wrong to downmod any post as "flamebait" that identifies a particular political party

it's "Flamebait" if it is not connected to logic or evidence and blatantly meant to incite vitiriol

it's a "Troll" if it uses "in the know" language to mimic what an on-topic post might superficially look like, but in the end it lacks the same logical, supported choherent point that "Flamebait" lacks

parents post was neither! they mention specific, checkable points as comparison

this kind of moderation is ruining slashdot

So... (2)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | about 5 months ago | (#46840957)

I take it that this is going to be a beta test and that as soon (or sooner) than we eventually GTFO of that sand-trap, the same vendors will pop up with a variety of exciting new biometric homeland security and law enforcement solutions?

Re:So... (1)

Matheus (586080) | about 5 months ago | (#46842439)

No... everything in use over there is already available over here. Afghanistan is "Production" not "QA"

Beta Dominance (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46840979)

How many times to I have to tell Slashdot to use the classic mode.
 
  I will NEVER use beta!

Good against Russian Spetsnaz, maybe soon (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46840987)

I could see this stuff being very useful in countries bordering Russia to identify Russian "Spetsnaz" operators inflltrating an area that Putin wants to take over. (Spetsnaz are basically secular terrorists, working to spread fear and turmoil to soften up an area prior to regular Russian forces rolling in) Estonia would probably love to have this ability "yesterday" as they say. For the West in general, having the ability to ID and arrest Spetsnaz , and get some confessions from some, would be extremely valuable in discrediting Russian pretexts for invasion. I hate to say this but as a European I think this will be needed soon. Don't forget that Spetsnaz has female operators and paunchy looking middled aged men too, whatever allows them to blend in.

Re:Good against Russian Spetsnaz, maybe soon (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46842659)

I could see this stuff being very useful in countries bordering Amerika to identify Navy Seals infiltrating an area that Obama wants to take over. (Seals are basically secular terrorists, working to spread fear and turmoil to soften up an area prior to regular US forces rolling in) Syria would probably love to have this ability "yesterday" as they say. For the East in general, having the ability to ID and arrest Seals, and get some confessions from some, would be extremely valuable in discrediting US pretexts for invasion. I hate to say this but as a European I think this will be needed soon. Don't forget that Seals have female operators and paunchy looking middled aged men too, whatever allows them to blend in.

Fixed that for you.

Re:Good against Russian Spetsnaz, maybe soon (1)

HiThere (15173) | about 5 months ago | (#46845679)

That's not a fix, as the grandparent was also correct.

Just because the US govt. has no apparent morals, don't presume that other governments do. Some of them may.

Sounds like it could work here too.. (2)

xxxJonBoyxxx (565205) | about 5 months ago | (#46840991)

From the TFA...

"Locate and identify every resident (visit and record every house and business). At a minimum, fully biometrically enroll all military-age males as follows: Full sets of fingerprints, Full face photo, Iris scans, Names and all variants of names
Use badging to identify local leaders, and key personnel.
Track persons of interest; unusual travel patterns may indicate unusual activities."

"All biometric data collected (is) sent back to the DOD’s Automated Biometric Identification System (ABIS) located in West Virginia, where it is stored and also shared with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and FBI. Partnerships with other nations also allow the DOD to run data against biometrics collected by foreign governments and law enforcement."

one saving grace (2)

dlt074 (548126) | about 5 months ago | (#46841677)

getting the info off the devices and back to the DOD does not always happen. i know of numerous times an entire missions worth of data was never uploaded to a computer and/or never sent any further up the chain. it may be collected, but it's not all getting where they want it.

and from what I saw in two tours, the data that does make it up never amounts to anything actionable. a waste of money and resources right now.

i think you're right. it is a good place to beta test and will be much more useful here at home, where people are much easier to identify and track.

Re:Sounds like it could work here too.. (1)

nickmalthus (972450) | about 5 months ago | (#46842533)

This is an extremely frightening abuse of power. Imaging if some foreign nation like China or Russia performed similar actions in the US. All potential dissidents documented and tracked like animals. If the US's actions in Afghanistan represent the pinnacle of Western Democracy it is no wonder they resist US presence in their country.

Re:Sounds like it could work here too.. (1)

mspohr (589790) | about 5 months ago | (#46842621)

This is a good start. We need to track everyone. It's best to start with the brown people. Eventually we can track everyone since anyone could be a potential "terrorist". I'm glad to see this already in production to help us control the peoples of the world.
( /sarcasm for those who are politically or humor impaired)

1984+4+4+4+4+4+4+4+4,,,, (2)

harvey the nerd (582806) | about 5 months ago | (#46841047)

Frightening. Societally, worse than the diseases and broken bodies that come home from these wars. Many third world countries will soon be more free than the USSA - time to emigrate.

Re:1984+4+4+4+4+4+4+4+4,,,, (2)

xxxJonBoyxxx (565205) | about 5 months ago | (#46841187)

>> Many third world countries will soon be more free than the USSA - time to emigrate.

"Freer" until you're killed by an executive-ordered, zero-oversight drone strike.

Oh wait, that can happen here too.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/... [huffingtonpost.com]
http://www.motherjones.com/moj... [motherjones.com]

Makes superstition look good (4, Interesting)

WillAdams (45638) | about 5 months ago | (#46841107)

Pretty soon all criminals, insurgents, terrorists and revolutionaries will find themselves practicing the same sort of precautions people used to use to protect themselves against ``witchcraft'':

  - not allowing any hair (or skin cells) to be taken by another
  - not allowing any instance of bleeding to stain anywhere someone else might have access to it
  - not allowing their picture to be taken, lest it steal their soul

Re: Makes superstition look good (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46841831)

Perhaps it wasn't superstition after all. Perhaps this one is not a first technological civilization here, but is the first one since last great catastrophic melting of polar ice caps and sudden flooding of nowadays continental shelfs, which up to then were probably inhabited arid planes by the seashore. There was plenty of time and opportunity for advanced civilization to rise, explore, learn, teach and plant some common knowledge (whose sources and proofs most students find to much to understand and memorize). If our civilization was to end abruptly and reduce itself to stone age level, "E = mc2" would probably got parroted for thousands of years. Thorough underwater archaeological excavation along former continental shores might score some incredible surprises.

Re: Makes superstition look good (1)

HornWumpus (783565) | about 5 months ago | (#46845201)

The reason that isn't possible (and it is basically impossible that there were intelligent dinosaurs for a brief time) is the lack of toilets in the fossil record.

Sanitation is necessary for large populations. Function drives fashion. If there was an advanced civilization, they would have had toilets. Toilets would be made of ceramics (at least some) and there would have to be a large number of them.

Some toilets would have survived from any previous advanced civilization.

Re: Makes superstition look good (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | about 5 months ago | (#46845777)

Some toilets would have survived from any previous advanced civilization.

Because I love a good argument, what if they grew genetically modified plant toilets, which are now extinct because they were engineered not to be invasive, and died out without cultivation? Toilets are so primitive.

Re: Makes superstition look good (1)

HornWumpus (783565) | about 5 months ago | (#46846703)

There would have been a period between developing cities and requiring toilets and developing genetic engineering. Some toilets would have survived.

Re: Makes superstition look good (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | about 5 months ago | (#46847129)

There would have been a period between developing cities and requiring toilets and developing genetic engineering. Some toilets would have survived.

Maybe they were crapping in compostable bags and burying them under plants. We have that technology today, we can use it to save water.

Re: Makes superstition look good (1)

HornWumpus (783565) | about 5 months ago | (#46847279)

Won't scale. Disease vector.

Also doesn't eliminate need for old school chamber pots.

Re: Makes superstition look good (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | about 5 months ago | (#46847407)

Won't scale. Disease vector.

You're presuming that they will have had high population density, but there's no reason to assume that. It's efficient, but it's not necessarily desirable.

Also doesn't eliminate need for old school chamber pots.

They were made out of valuable metals and they were ruthlessly tracked down and recycled.

Re: Makes superstition look good (1)

HornWumpus (783565) | about 5 months ago | (#46847463)

Ceramic is much cheaper and readily available then metal of any kind.

Re: Makes superstition look good (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | about 5 months ago | (#46848365)

Ceramic is much cheaper and readily available then metal of any kind.

Sure, but metal was more readily available then, so they used it instead. Alternately, they brought their biodegradable toilets with them, on their spaceships.

I've read enough sci-fi to do this all day, this isn't even a warmup :)

Re: Makes superstition look good (1)

HornWumpus (783565) | about 5 months ago | (#46848767)

If your argument requires the laws of physics to change ('metal was more readily available then') it probably isn't a very good one.

Metal is cheap today. I've only rarely seen metal urinals and never seen a metal crapper.

Re: Makes superstition look good (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | about 5 months ago | (#46850945)

Metal is cheap today. I've only rarely seen metal urinals and never seen a metal crapper.

Forming the metal into the shape of a toilet is expensive, with current technology. Stainless steel toilets are used anyway, in parks and on ships.

Re: Makes superstition look good (1)

HornWumpus (783565) | about 5 months ago | (#46854803)

Which brings me back to my main point. Function and economics would make many toilets out of ceramics. Which we would find in the fossil record or among the ruins. Study of ancient ceramics is a well advanced field of archeology.

Re: Makes superstition look good (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | about 5 months ago | (#46855457)

Well, that's why the only "theory" which would actually work with such an idea is the alien visitors theory. A three hour tour. But then you have to explain where they came from, which is why the razor shaves that one right off, along with the whole idea. Still, it's a fun thought experiment.

Re: Makes superstition look good (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46851475)

Never been to India have you?

Re: Makes superstition look good (1)

HornWumpus (783565) | about 5 months ago | (#46852859)

Do you honestly believe there are _no_ ceramic toilets in India?

Re: Makes superstition look good (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46853211)

Obviously there are some now, but do you honestly believe they would have developed them by themselves? Are you saying the population isn't large enough? Or they aren't advanced enough yet?

Re: Makes superstition look good (1)

HornWumpus (783565) | about 5 months ago | (#46854783)

They had them before we got there. Granting they might not have had running water, the rich have had chamber pots for centuries.

Evil Republicans Hate Gaia (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46841283)

http://www.thenation.com/article/179461/new-abolitionism?page=0,0

"If I’ve done my job so far, you should, right about now, be feeling despair. If, indeed, what we need to save the earth is to forcibly pry trillions of dollars of wealth out of the hands of its owners"

I love it! Power to the (correct) people! Behead the rich!

"What the climate justice movement is demanding is the ultimate abolition of fossil fuels. And our fates all depend on whether they succeed."

Uh huh. Genuis right there. Of course we will have to reduce the population of the planet by about 6 billion people to make this work, but I personally don't have any problem with that.

Statism! Pay no attention to all the dead bodies.

Re:Evil Republicans Hate Gaia (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46841395)

Does Chris Hayes realize that the biggest death toll from employing his "final solution" would be in the blue states? Imagine how unlivable NYC or Chicago or Boston would be without fossil fuels.

How well did New Yorkers cope after Hurricane Sandy, again? I seem to recall some of them dumpster diving within 48 hours, because they were out of food...

The refusal of the Left to embrace nuclear energy (as even the EU does) tells me that they really dont believe that the burning of fossil fuels will lead to catastrophe. They believe nothing that they profess to believe.

So Chris Hayes is so all over the 'stop burning oil' bullshit, let's see him stop, right now, using any product or service that is powered or supplied by fossil fuels. If he does this then I will do the same, guaran-fucking-teed.

How much you want to bet he won't? And facts is facts you jack asses; if he doesn't do this, he doesn't believe his bullshit, as most of you shitbirds don't either.

Put up or shut up.

Re:Evil Republicans Hate Gaia (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46841555)

Liberals think power comes from wall outlets and food comes from grocery stores.

Re:Evil Republicans Hate Gaia (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46841919)

Indeed, and that money all comes from taxes!

It's so simple and basic and clear how spectacularly wrong they are, it's difficult to believe how it is that the seem to always win elections.

Then one looks at the popular line up on television - that is what "most" people watch, and it all becomes clear.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r_4jrMwvZ2A

You see, truth is stranger than fiction.

http://weknowmemes.com/2012/05/ow-my-balls-comes-true-on-americas-got-talent/

Completely agree with other posts (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46841409)

Required to keep the US oligopoly from being overthrown someday. And a good revenue stream to sell to other despot governments.

The ongoing battle (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46841617)

against the Afghan people.

Google called (1)

Megahard (1053072) | about 5 months ago | (#46841643)

They want their business model back.

Yeah, it's tough when we're bad racists. (2)

BrendaEM (871664) | about 5 months ago | (#46841757)

When you become a better racist, you can identify smaller factions of people.

Oh, I might be wrong, it just might be a religious thing.

Ahh, we're over there for the oil.

Wait, WTF are we doing over there?

Re:Yeah, it's tough when we're bad racists. (1)

Virtucon (127420) | about 5 months ago | (#46842073)

I thought it was because they all looked the same and as George Carlin said we have a policy on bombing brown people.

Interesting Implication of Obvious Implication (4, Interesting)

Tokolosh (1256448) | about 5 months ago | (#46842037)

This item, and the subsequent discussion posts, do not state the obvious implication that this kind of tracking is expected to creep into the US.

The really interesting part to me, is that nobody found it necessary to say so. It is automatically assumed that anyone reading will immediately come to the same conclusion, and therefore it need not be stated.

That we have come to this, is scary (notwithstanding my tag).

Re:Interesting Implication of Obvious Implication (2)

Matheus (586080) | about 5 months ago | (#46843563)

Sad state of the world aside you're missing an important detail... this is *already over here. Do you have a drivers license? You're in a DB. Do you have a Passport? You're in a DB. Have you ever served in any branch of the armed forces? You're in a DB. Have you ever applied for clearance? You're in a DB. Have you ever been arrested for *anything? You're in a DB. As a child did you ever take a field trip to a local police station and get fingerprinted/etc? They kept all that... If you didn't answer yes to any of those questions then go ahead and continue your blissful existence off the grid but else you don't need to be paranoid. It is true. It is not hidden. This is already the way it is.

Re:Interesting Implication of Obvious Implication (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46844003)

It's already here, just not in this amount. Remember Brandon Mayfield? Look for a lot more of those cases.

Cached Link (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46842085)

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:fZqeK2kxB1gJ:https://publicintelligence.net/identity-dominance/

moD 0p (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46842615)

to yet another about half of the If you do not [samag.com] in the The gay niigers You join today! SLING you can philosophies must irc.secsup.org or numbers continue

Sorting and Counterinsurgency. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46843289)

It bears reminding that older methods of counterinsurgency often backfired because they relied on mass punishment of the innocent in order to (attempt to) coerce the enemy. That often backfired because it renews the enemy forces from the population one just shat on.

Mapping opposition human networks is far more reasonable (and not a war crime) than putting Zippos to a village where one suspects hostiles are being harbored.

Re:Sorting and Counterinsurgency. (1)

HiThere (15173) | about 5 months ago | (#46845745)

Reasonable? Depends. Who benefits, who pays. It's probably more effective. And people don't notice how they've been targeted as hostages, so they may not object. And it lets you plan to kill not only the target, but all his friends and relatives too, so you don't plan on making enemies.

OTOH, if they worried about those factors, they wouldn't engage in the indiscriminate drone attacks. So they probably don't care about how many people they make hate them, at least judging by their actions.

Perhaps the best argument is that it isn't currently a recognized war crime. Not that the US is renowned for paying attention to that, either. (Others are worse, but that's a separate matter.) Cynically my feeling is that they are doing this as a test to see how useful this kind of information is when they need to suppress a population.

So, map the world's population (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46844107)

Attack a country and then build a biometric map of the country's citizens. But, then yell if somebody protests. Ugh

What would Hitler/Stalin have done with this? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46845839)

Power corrupts. . . I think it's clear where we are headed.

Sadly (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46846345)

Sadly this intelligence gathering did not go unnoticed by the Taliban, and now NGO's trying to inoculate the local population against horrible diseases (and in no way connected to the US Army), get blown up by the Taliban (they have killed a lot of them) because of the perceived association, however misguided.

what if someone refuses to give fingerprints... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46848343)

And what happens to those who refuse to give their fingerprints? :)

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>