Let's discuss data mining, shall we?

For a long time I have been having conversations with friends and associates about the absence of terror attacks on U.S. soil.

I wonder why there hasn't been a single - even minor - terrorist event since 9/11. Don't get me wrong, here. I am thankful, ecstatic, thrilled that there hasn't been.

But I also realize that this is a pretty big and difficult country to defend and there are plenty of extremists who truly hate America and would like nothing more than to blow something up over here.

In short, I don't think the lack of terror is from a lack of desire on the part of the extremists.

I think most of the credit goes to the U.S. government.

And while, as I said earlier, I am thrilled at the success, I wonder just how they are going about it.

Well, I think a lot of it has to do with what they like to call data mining in Washington these days.

You see, the government possesses some pretty powerful data mining technology. And the government isn't afraid to use it.

Everybody's heard about the National Security Agency's eavesdropping program and its collection of telephone data.

But those aren't the first brushes with privacy concerns the government has had.

After the 9/11 attacks, the Pentagon started setting up a data base full of all kinds of information about American's personal lives.

Then they started writing programs to search that data for patterns that could lead to terrorist activities.

Congress found out about it and shut it down.

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld then appointed a committee to figure out some benign ways the government could use data mining.

Enter Newton Minow, who chaired the Technology and Privacy Advisory Committee. His committee issued a report in 2004 called "Safeguarding Privacy in the Fight Against Terrorism."

(Minow headed the Federal Communications Commission during the Kennedy administration.)

Minow, in a recent National Public Radio interview, said, "The technology is very powerful and we've got to use it. The problem is we've got to use it in a way that does not harm every ordinary American."

He adds, "The specific concerns are that innocent people who have done nothing wrong will get caught up in this technology. A lot of people have the same names, there can be errors in the records, a lot of innocent people get stopped from traveling ... It's very easy to make a lot of mistakes with this technology."

Minow says despite the fact that Rumsfeld appointed the committee, the TAPAC report, which was presented to the Bush administration and Congress, was largely ignored.

You can view the report here:

www.npr.org/documents /2006/may/tapac.pdf

Here are some types of information, detailed in the TAPAC report, that businesses and other private sector entities routinely collect about individuals:

• Your health history; your credit history; your marital history; your educational history; your employment history.

• The times and telephone numbers of every call you make and receive.

• The magazines you subscribe to and the books you borrow from the library.

• Your travel history.

• The trail of your cash withdrawals.

• All your purchases by credit card, debit card or check. In the not-so-distant future, when electronic cash becomes the rule, even the purchases you make with bills and coins could be logged.

• What you eat. No sooner had supermarket scanners gone on line than data began to be tracked for marketing purposes.

• Your electronic mail and your telephone messages.

• Where you go and what you see on the World Wide Web.

This information serves valuable purposes in the private sector, like customized delivery of services or rewarding frequent shoppers.

You know how it works. You buy something at Buyitall. You swipe your Buyitall card. When you got your Buyitall card, you filled out an application with your e-mail address. Buyitall tracks your purchases. Buyitall e-mails you coupons and alerts you when stuff you like to buy goes on sale.

This kind of marketing makes you an even more loyal Buyitall shopper.

And Buyitall has a privacy policy. They won't give out your personal information to anyone.

Well, unless of course the government comes knocking.

This is where the problem occurs.

Some people in government think, as long as they're fighting terror, they should be able to "mine data" at will. They think things like phone and health and shopping and mail and e-mail records should all be up for grabs.

After all, we're fighting terrorists. We can cross reference these massive data bases, uncover behavioral trends and root out likely terror suspects.

I strongly disagree. I thing the government should have probable cause and a warrant before knocking.

Why? I mean after all, if you don't have anything to hide, why would you care if the government is poking around in all manner of your personal affairs?

Well, there's the obvious - the invasion of privacy. There's the apparent unconstitutionality. There's the likelihood of mistakes and innocent people being hassled.

There are lots of reasons and a column could be written about each one of them.

But for now, let's focus on a more subtle, yet far more significant reason warrantless government snooping is bad. Let's take the 10,000-foot view for a moment.

I think a 40-year-old quote from Hubert Humphrey sums it up pretty well.

"We act differently when we are being observed. If we can never be sure whether or not we are being watched and listened to, all our actions will be altered and our very character changed."

See, this kind of governmental activity tends to chill individual behavior. Individuality is lost.

The protected rights of expression, speech, protest, association and political participation are placed in jeopardy, too.

People start changing their behavior, trying to conform to some perceivedÊsense of what is "normal." Freedom is eroded.

Professor and former Deputy Attorney General Philip Heymann, quoted in the TAPAC report, wrote: "No matter how honest the government was in restricting its uses of the data, many citizens would become more cautious in their activities, including being less outspoken in their dissent to government policies."

That's the last thing we want to happen in this country - especially today.

Americans fought and died to protect the freedoms warrantless government snooping erodes. [[In-content Ad]]