|
Wacky Canadians Still Believe in Privacy
Wasgungton Post
By Al Kamen
Friday, April 25, 2008; A21
Homeland Security chief Michael Chertoff caused a little ruckus up north a
couple weeks ago as he was pushing his plan to share databases of
international air travelers' fingerprints with the Canadians, Brits and
Aussies.
In an interview with an excessively squeamish Canadian reporter, Chertoff
was told: "Some are raising that the privacy aspects of this thing, you
know, sharing of that kind of data, very personal data, among four countries
is quite a scary thing."
Nonsense, Chertoff responded. "Well, first of all, a fingerprint is hardly
personal data because you leave it on glasses and silverware and articles
all over the world. They're like footprints. They're not particularly
private," he said, according to Canadian news reports and privacy lawyer
Peter Swire, a senior fellow and guest blogger at the Center for American
Progress.
Absolutely. But the old-fashioned Canadians seem to think otherwise. They
even have someone who monitors privacy issues, Privacy Commissioner Jennifer
Stoddart, who promptly wrote the minister of public safety and preparedness
to object, noting that Canadian law "defines fingerprints as personal
information" and that "fingerprints constitute extremely personal
information for which there is clearly a high expectation of privacy."
That's why, she wrote with a hint of huffiness, "Canadians rightly expect
their government to respect their civil liberties and personal information
from abuse."
Oh yeah? Well, our Supreme Court ruled in 1985 that you have to have
probable cause before you haul someone off and fingerprint them. Justice
Byron R. White wrote the opinion, joined by Warren E. Burger and William H.
Rehnquist, no less.
But in wartime, maybe we have different expectations, okay? As Chertoff, who
after all was recently a federal appeals judge, knows quite well, no one
should expect privacy in a restaurant or anywhere else where a fingerprint
might be left.
And we don't. That's why many diners here are beginning to use gloves when
they eat at restaurants and some even wear those hospital booties. Others
prefer just a discreet swipe of utensils and glassware with a Wet-Nap to
ensure against DNA retrieval from saliva. (There is a growing -- and
deplorable -- trend to bring personal cutlery, but that really seems
excessive and, in finer establishments, downright disrespectful, especially
if it's plastic.)
Is it possible the Canadians thought those signs at beachfront eateries --
"No shirt, no shoes, no service" -- were an effort to maintain appropriate
attire? Everyone down here knows the restaurants just wanted to prevent the
feds from trying to collect toe prints.
Canadians probably still go to barbershops -- where a single hair in the
right hands can provide DNA, general health info, recent drug use data and
other information. Our cousins probably haven't read about the growing
in-home trim movement here.
And there's an easy way to guard against theft of your secret mattress Sleep
Number. Just change the setting every morning before you leave.
Is Nothing Sacred?
Speaking of privacy, it appears a recent uproar by top-level Hill aides --
mostly on the House side -- over Web site LegiStorm's posting of their
signatures and home addresses has been resolved, LegiStorm founder Jock
Friedly told Roll Call. The House paid the costs -- about $3,100 -- to
redact the information from his posting of the required public disclosure
forms.
House aides had complained that publication of some information could lead
to identity theft or stalking and such.
Nope, Apparently Not
Former senator Paul Laxalt's all male, annual lamb fry dinner at the
Georgetown Club tends not to be an especially raucous affair. The 28th
dinner the other night, prepared as always in Basque style in honor of
Laxalt's heritage, featured the usual delicacy of the night, lamb's
testicles, which are said to have unusual medicinal qualities.
And while some of the tuxedoed and slightly aging pols and pals -- including
Vice President Cheney, Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska), former House Republican
leader Bob Michel, retired Marine Gen. P.X. Kelley, former GOP chairman and
now lobbyist Frank Fahrenkopf, former Veterans Affairs secretary and former
ambassador to the Vatican Jim Nicholson, and legendary lobbyist Bill
Timmons-- don't move as fast as they used to, they can still hop to it in an
emergency.
And they did when White House counsel Fred Fielding appeared to be choking
-- not on the featured delicacy, we are assured. Ron Kaufman of Dutko
Worldwide (and a volunteer for Mitt Romney's campaign) and then Ed Rollins
(who played a lead role in Mike Huckabee's bid for the White House) took
turns trying the Heimlich maneuver to dislodge it. Rollins brought over a
chair to stand on for extra leverage, one guest said.
There's some disagreement about what happened next. One attendee said
Rollins popped the obstruction out, another said Fielding eventually
swallowed it. Well, either way . . .
Out of African Affairs
Buzz at the State Department is that Jendayi Frazier, assistant secretary
for African affairs, is heading for the private sector, perhaps something
like the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
Frazier, who has something of a reputation at State for an abrasive,
confrontational style, had been a graduate student at Stanford University
when Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was teaching there. Frazier worked
at the National Security Council as head of African affairs during President
Bush's first term, and then was ambassador to South Africa before taking her
current job in 2005.
Frazier's deputy, Linda Thomas- Greenfield, a career diplomat who might have
taken over, has been nominated to be ambassador to Liberia. There had been
chatter about trying to confirm a political appointee in the assistant
secretaryship, but that move was quashed and a career officer is said to be
stepping in to run the shop.
Language Alert! You can call Islamist extremists lots of things, but do not
call them: 1) jihadists 2) mujaheddin or 3) Islamo-fascists. And remember
that al-Qaeda is not to be called a movement.
The Associated Press reports that agencies such as the State Department, the
Department of Homeland Security and the National Counterterrorism Center are
telling their people not to describe Islamist extremists in those terms,
according to internal documents.
The reason for the change is tactical. Using such words, the administration
now believes, may act to boost support for radicals among Arabs and Muslims
by giving them a veneer of religious credibility or offending moderates.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/24/AR2008042403
617.html
|
| |
| |
Zolpitald <zsorbitald@hotmail.co.uk> allegedly said in
news:C43761DA.1A766%zsorbitald@hotmail.co.uk:
Wacky Canadians Still Believe in Privacy
Wasgungton Post
By Al Kamen
Friday, April 25, 2008; A21
[.............]
Language Alert! You can call Islamist extremists lots of things, but
do not call them: 1) jihadists 2) mujaheddin or 3) Islamo-fascists.
And remember that al-Qaeda is not to be called a movement.
The Associated Press reports that agencies such as the State
Department, the Department of Homeland Security and the National
Counterterrorism Center are telling their people not to describe
Islamist extremists in those terms, according to internal documents.
The reason for the change is tactical. Using such words, the
administration now believes, may act to boost support for radicals
among Arabs and Muslims by giving them a veneer of religious
credibility or offending moderates.
Hmmmmmm...
Gee.. you would think that invading and occupying a WHOLE MUSLIM country
for no @$#*ing reason that any rational person can understnd, would have
pretty much closed the door on THAT.... but NO the "real" reason every last
muslim hates our guts and wants to kill us is because we have been using
the WRONG words... YES.. and it was the adminstration of our BELOVED LITTLE
LEADER that figured all this out...
Are we not LUCKY to be blessed with such GENIUS ????
rotfl...
And you STILL wonder WHY we are in such a @$#*ing mess ????
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/24/AR20080
42403 617.html
--
AW
<small but dangerous>
|
| |
| |
|
