Letter: Who benefits from biometrics use?
A reader writes that individuals are often surveyed and asks whether biometrics is another method to "serve national security or corporate interests."
Regarding "Bush pushes biometrics for national security": Warrantless wiretaps, surveillance satellites, video cameras and who knows what other equipment are used to collect massive amounts of information on individuals every day. That information is fed into huge databases without the general public's knowledge. Bush decided that is not enough so he needs biometrics, too, which obviously will not be limited to suspects and known terrorists. While the Pentagon cannot track billions of U.S. taxpayer money in Iraq, but spends billions on developing ways to track U.S. citizens is astonishing.
What criteria specifically is used to deem someone a "threat" to national security or is it based on Bush's instinct? Have we, the people, become the enemy? Or perhaps Bush is helping out his buddies who specialize in surveillance technology. After all, three of the telecoms (AT&T, Sprint and Verizon) alone increased their federal contract revenue in FY 2006 by $2.6 billion dollars. Other companies specializing in surveillance methods, equipment etc. are making hand-over-fist in profit, too.
Technological advancements geared more for increasing ways for the government to [survey] its citizens rather than for bettering the human condition ought to give us pause.
Furthermore this begs asking whether biometrics are meant to better serve national security or corporate interests? Perhaps Bush would like to explain that. However, I will not be holding my breath waiting for him to do so.
Mindy Huie
What do you think? Paste a comment in the box below (registration required), or send your comment to letters@fcw.com (subject line: Blog comment) and we'll post it.
What criteria specifically is used to deem someone a "threat" to national security or is it based on Bush's instinct? Have we, the people, become the enemy? Or perhaps Bush is helping out his buddies who specialize in surveillance technology. After all, three of the telecoms (AT&T, Sprint and Verizon) alone increased their federal contract revenue in FY 2006 by $2.6 billion dollars. Other companies specializing in surveillance methods, equipment etc. are making hand-over-fist in profit, too.
Technological advancements geared more for increasing ways for the government to [survey] its citizens rather than for bettering the human condition ought to give us pause.
Furthermore this begs asking whether biometrics are meant to better serve national security or corporate interests? Perhaps Bush would like to explain that. However, I will not be holding my breath waiting for him to do so.
Mindy Huie
What do you think? Paste a comment in the box below (registration required), or send your comment to letters@fcw.com (subject line: Blog comment) and we'll post it.