Surveillance society's historically have not preserved the "social order" they were meant to preserve over the long run. See what has happened to East Germany or Ceausescu's Romania, among others. That the USA is going down this treacherous path is most disturbing. All that will gain from this are the companies that sell the technology and the bureaucracies that will administer it, nothing more.

"Sed quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"

paranoia:

1. a psychosis characterized by systematized delusions of persecution, usually without hallucinations.

2. a tendency on the part of an individual or group toward excessive or irrational suspiciousness and distrustfulness of others.

Oh, yeah, this operation is fail-safe.

"They will analyze for subtle changes, such as people forming in groups or loitering" - Right, this never happens at a minor-league hockey game unless terrorists are involved.

"The cameras' images will help analysts located nearby look for left-behind bombs, suspicious backpacks or concealed objects such as suicide belts and vests" - or flasks of booze or camera cases? Why wait until the bombs are left behind? Why not just confiscate 'em on the way in? Doesn't everybody entering the rink already go through a metal detector and a pat-down?

"We want to know how many people can be tracked simultaneously," - It's so much easier than spying on you guys one at a time.

"We train them to look for certain signatures," - just like TSA.

The Toyota Center has about 7,700 seats - a prime terrorist target and a real test for this new-fangled invasion of privacy, er, terror-prevention tool.

http://www.practicalfishkeeping.co.uk/pfk/pages/item.php?news=1803

STOP THE REPUBLICANS NOW!

Another chance to abuse our civil libertys.

Don't form in groups, don't talk to your friends, don't carry a backpack or wear a belt. Go directly to your assigned seat, don't pass go and don't collect $200.

Lobo Gris

"...analyze images for potential explosive threats, said Jim Tuttle, explosives division director for Homeland Security."

Are the Tri-City Americans expected to bomb out, or get bombed; who are they playing?

Nevermind; I looked at the schedule, I think they will get bombed.

land of the free my ass I say...

"They will analyze for subtle changes, such as people forming in groups or loitering"

That's one of the most retarded statements I've heard yet.

"The only thing we have to fear -- is fear itself!" Thanks, Franklin! And look where our fear is now taking us and what was our democratic dream -- into that dark dark tunnel of nightmares and of classic dictatorship where begging, shreiks and screams are heard.

That's a bunch of baloney. Big Brother wants to watch you--the people.

So far surveillance has been of people, individuals, in groups, in crowds on the street, etc. Can anyone name successful prevention of a bomb via "looking" at people?

How much is high tech "we can build it, buy it" and "let's play with high tech toys that cost a lot of money" and spy on folks. Most has been on dissenters.

Remember the guy who got arrested, touted all over tv as having a bomb in Atlanta during the Olympics? Because he had a backpack? But he didn't have a bomb, had his life totally messed up.... People have had bombs. Back to first question: when has a camera,etc. stopped a bombing?

I get the sense that the trappings of power - of which surveillance is one - are being sought for their own sake today. Like the greedy pursuit of wealth that can never be satisfied, neither can the greedy pursuit of power. I don't think these people stop to consider where this will eventually lead: to telescreens in our houses, microphones on our person, and government approval for everything we do.

Dave
http://daveeriqat.wordpress.com/

Wow, so 'gathering in groups or loitering' is now suspicious behavior that triggers increased scrutiny by the police.

Have these people ever been on the concourse of an arena during an intermission of a concert or sporting event? 'gathering in groups or loitering' is what the entire crowd is doing.

And, exactly how many sporting venues have been the targets of terrorist attacks in the US? I can't think of any. So, they are doing this highly intrusive work to stop a problem that doesn't exist.

----------------------------
"To know, and not to do, is not to know"

www.samsonsworld.blogspot.com

"They will analyze for subtle changes, such as people forming in groups or loitering."
~ Nick Lombardo

"Paranoia is the ability to make connections."
~ Thomas Pynchon

"The tests at the Toyota Center will be announced to those who attend events at the center between Sept. 26 and Nov. 9 so they can opt out of the scanning if they choose."

How does someone 'opt out of the scanning' if they are scanning the whole crowd looking for people gathering in groups and loitering?

Do you just walk around with your middle finger in the air, and the people on the cameras know that the signal for 'opting out'?

----------------------------
"To know, and not to do, is not to know"

www.samsonsworld.blogspot.com

I strongly agree that technology confers power which entices power freaks and control freaks.

In recent weeks, my employer has upgraded our software and given us nice new computers.

Since that time, I've noticed that the "read receipt requested" e-mail feature, which actually existed on our previous system, is suddenly being used by staff in our central office (headquarters). My guess is that central office staff got training on the new system, and some people just "discovered" this feature.

Well, OK. They may be within their rights to demand such a confirmation-- whether there are any consequences for DECLINING to acknowledge receipt, which recipients can do, remains to be seen.

But yesterday I discovered ANOTHER version of this. I deleted a couple of messages pertaining to an annual donation program, and damned if a message didn't pop up telling me that the sender wanted to know when I DELETED the message.

WTF? Why in the world would someone "need" to know if and when I choose to delete a message? This time I DID nix the acknowledgement. I don't know whether this is just one person going a little nuts with the new toys, or whether it's actually a policy. But it's definitely creepy.

everybody dies...may we at least be allowed to enjoy our lives? There was a time when one's privacy was a thing to be supremely respected, as opposed to suspected...innocent until proven guilty?

"Britain is now the most intensely monitored country in the world, according to surveillance experts, with 4.2 million CCTV cameras installed, equivalent to one for every 14 people."

"So blanketing is the surveillance that the average resident of London runs the possibility of being photographed up to 300 times a day just moving around the capital, civil liberties campaigners say."

http://www.reuters.com/article/technologyNews/idUSL2169931620070523 (May 27, 2007)

This article states that unmanned spy drones are being deployed in Britain for remote sensing it's own citizens.

The US has a lot of catching-up to do.

Expect to see absent-minded people who leave things behind being gunned down in the near future. Best not to have any family/club/school reunions so as to avoid suspicious gatherings.

All photographers (with backpacks) are already designated terrorists. The larger the camera and tripod the more suspicious you are -terrorists always aim to make themselves very conspicuous with professional camera gear -only the highest resolution pictures taken with perfect light and with artistic framing are acceptable to today's discriminating terrorist. They will spend hours at their targets waiting for just the right light.

Welcome to the new Soviet Union of United States.

Wait until the new "pain ray" projectors are also installed. Boy, are those loiterers and conversationalists in for an unpleasant surprise!

What do people do at Toyota Center other than form in groups and loiter to watch other people run around? What is it that those high tech cameras and radars do besides see through the clothing of busty women and stop Pacemakers?

Where are those rightwing trolls now? I guess they don't want to be exposed for their blatant support of BIG GOVERNMENT, do they?

‘Until they become conscious they will never rebel, and until they have rebelled they cannot become conscious’
--George Orwell

Wow! What a switch! No anti-Obama diatribes. But there have been enough in recent days at Common Dreams to justify, I think, putting my own rant right here. I included it with the article on Obama youth groups which never seemed to get too much of a play, or maybe I wasn't watching-- anyway, here are my thoughts again.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I can only guess in some of the animus-toward-Obama samples whether racism is a factor. Clearly it is in many. And isn't in some.

In the group that's hard to figure out, one certainly could ask whether the members are emotional pygmies (sounds racist but think SHORT). And are power
mad, realizing that for once in their blighted life they can spite the whole world by not giving it the American president it wants.

Will that help this country? Don't think so. Is helping this country even a motive in the anti-Obama diatribes at Common Dreams? Someone may think so-- not I.

When people advocate third and fourth party candidacies, for instance, I can't buy it, thinking there must be a better time for such overhaul and re-tooling-- admittedly an estimable idea. Where's focus, though, and urgency, and "living in the moment"?

The election is very close (in two senses) and there are two candidates (and two candidates only from any possible realism standpoint), and people who say the two candidates are the same are projective foolers of themselves.

Am I being dramatic when I say that survival of the U.S. and of the world may depend on one voter not abstaining and then making the better choice? Not if you consider world history-- the decline and fall of all empire, or the basic literary-historic precept that power as it becomes more absolute corrupts absolutely.

McCain-- he's a hothead, makes impulsive decisions, thinks he can win in Iraq.

The only way he could do that is bring a million souls back from the dead.

Ralph Nader's biggest investment has been Cisco Systems for years. 1.2 million dollars in 2000.

Naomi Klein says Cisco Systems works "hand in glove" with China on surveillance and monitoring of it's citizens.

The same technology that watches us.

Thank You Naomi.

"The tests at the Toyota Center will be announced to those who attend events at the center between Sept. 26 and Nov. 9 so they can opt out of the scanning if they choose."

OK, come on all youse terrorists types-- let's opt out now!

thank you cd editors for posting this article...

a few thoughts and reflections.

so what exactly is the team of security officers going to do after they'e determined that an unsavory group (potentially threatening group of people - 10 to 1 they'll be a group of african americans bullshitting after a basketball game, or maybe they'll just focus their hostilities towards groups of people who resemble wedding parties like they do in afghanastan) is approaching the stadium, once they've determined a threat how will they respond? unwarranted detention?

"stop!! police!!" tasers in hand (or maybe they'll mount tasers in strategic locations to zap the potential terrorists from the command and control center in the arena. who knows, one thing is certain... we're inching closer to a totalitarian state....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_state

{......The term police state describes a state in which the government exercises rigid and repressive controls over the social, economic and political life of the population. A police state typically exhibits elements of totalitarianism and social control, and there is usually little or no distinction between the law and the exercise of political power by the executive.

The inhabitants of a police state experience restrictions on their mobility, and on their freedom to express or communicate political or other views, which are subject to police monitoring or enforcement. Political control may be exerted by means of a secret police force which operates outside the boundaries normally imposed by a constitutional republic.[1]

Classification of a police state

The classification of a country or regime as a police state is usually contested and debated. Because of the pejorative connotation of the term, it is rare that a country will identify itself as a police state. The classification is often established by an internal whistleblower or an external critic or activist group. The use of the term is motivated as a response to the laws, policies and actions of that regime, and is often used pejoratively to describe the regime's concept of the social contract, human rights, and similar matters.

Genuine police states are fundamentally authoritarian, and are often dictatorships. However the degree of government repression varies widely among societies. Most regimes fall into some middle ground between the extremes of pure civil libertarianism and pure policestatism.

In times of national emergency or war, the balance which may usually exist between freedom and national security often tips in favour of security. This shift may lead to allegations that the nation in question has become, or is becoming, a police state.

Because there are different political perspectives as to what an appropriate balance is between individual freedom and national security, there are no definitive objective standards to determine whether the term "police state" applies to a particular nation at any given point in time. Thus, it is difficult to evaluate objectively the truth of allegations that a nation is, or is becoming, a police state. One way to view the concept of the police state and the free state is through the medium of a balance or scale, where any law focused on removing liberty is seen as moving towards a police state, and any law which limits government oversight is seen as moving towards a free state.[2]

War is often portrayed in fiction as a perfect precursor to establishing a police state, as citizens are more dependent on their government and the police for safety than usual (see Fictional police states below).

Enlightened absolutism...

Under the political model of enlightened absolutism, the ruler is the "highest servant of the state" and exercises absolute power to provide for the general welfare of the population. This model of government proposes that all the power of the state must be directed toward this end, and rejects codified, statutory constraints upon the ruler's absolute power. Thinkers such as Thomas Hobbes supported this type of absolutist government.

As the enlightened, absolute ruler is said to be charged with the public good, and implicitly infallible by right of appointment, even critical, loyal opposition to the ruler's party is a crime against the state. The concept of loyal opposition is incompatible with these politics. As public dissent is forbidden, it inevitably becomes secret, which, in turn, is countered with political repression via a secret police.

Liberal democracy, which emphasizes the rule of law, focuses on the police state's not being subject to law. Robert von Mohl, who first introduced the rule of law to German jurisprudence, contrasted the Rechtsstaat ("legal" or "constitutional" state) with the aristocratic Polizeistaat ("police state").[3] .......}

clearly these toys will be employed against peaceful demonstrators in the future. in the future we may have to adopt tactics similar to the masses in the film 'v is for vendetta', protesting as an anonymous mass of masked people...(as we already are viewed by the elites).

...peace...

When did we vote on this? I don't recall ever seeing this or other police-state tactics on any ballot. Why are we letting them force this crap down our throats?

If we opt out, can we still go to the game?

Well said everybody.

Police State, duh. Therefore, adapt to the technology and change our tactics when the Fit hits the Shan.

"You There! Stop Loitering with your Terrorist Comrades during the sanctioned Athletic competition!" lol.

Terrorism is simply the marketing ploy. This is $$ and control. No one will ever use these toys to 'detect terrorism'. It is designed to maximize "how many people we can track simultaneously." Are the terrorists each carrying one piece of the bomb, and they have to get together to loiter for a while outside the men's room in order to make it go boom?

Nothing will change until you are in the Cell or Storming the Gates!

HA HA HA
Well CD and the rest loves a story like this, it will make even more people hide in their basements posting in their web sites thinking they are making a change. Wouldn't want to get on the street for FEAR FEAR FEAR of my picture getting taken. Wouldn't want to wake up in Gitmo or Syria. I better just do nothing an follow orders.
WAKE THE F UP PEOPLE. You allowed this asshole to fix 2 elections in a row and nothing was done. You get what you allow to happen and the country and parts of the world are paying a heavy price.

OLD SAYING your reap what you sow

As a Libertarian I do detest this sort of thing....it is a step too far, although I do support bag searches at entry points if the person is allowed to decline and walk away and not enter the secure area