[extropy-chat] privacy rights

[Samantha Atkins]

On May 13, 2006, at 9:09 PM, spike wrote:

>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-
>> bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Samantha Atkins
>> Sent: Saturday, May 13, 2006 12:20 PM
>> To: ExI chat list
>> Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] privacy rights
>>
>>
>> On May 12, 2006, at 7:19 PM, spike wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Do restart this thread if you wish, Zero...
>>>
>>
>> "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses,
>> papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures,
>> shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable
>> cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing
>> the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
>> - Fourth Amendment to US Constitution
>>
>> How can people be secure against intrusions on their persons, papers
>> and effects at any arbitrary whim of the government if the government
>> presumes authority to spy upon the people in any matter it  
>> chooses?...
>> - samantha
>
>
> I do confess I am conflicted on this one.  What if they use that NSA
> technique to find and stop a terrorist act?


Those who would assume power over everyone and everything always  
attempt to make it about stopping something everyone is against.   
Terrorism is the latest excuse.  But I think we have seen about  
enough by now of stuff to "fight terrorism" to be a mite skeptical of  
this excuse.  Stuff found out by these "anti-terrorism means" is then  
part of the knowledge of the government.  The government has a LOT of  
other agendas besides fighting terrorism.  Once the means are widely  
in place to monitor all of us it becomes near impossible to fight  
back ever again or escape the tightening noose.

>   What if they already have?

So what?  Stopping terrorism dead, which they certainly haven't and  
can't, is no good to me if I lose or stand to lose all freedom and  
security from governmental abuse in the process.  Having some freedom  
and privacy left merely by government generosity is not good enough.

> They wouldn't be able to report it without giving away their hand.   
> So by
> opposing vocally the NSA actions, we would be putting lives in danger.

What?  Our lives are being put in danger by our government employing  
such means.  We don't need to aid this oppression by not even  
bleating a protest on the way to full state control.

>   But
> it does seem they could track only the calls that are going to known
> terrorist connections or certain countries.  Or certain area codes  
> known to
> harbor bad guys.  I dunno.  I'm withholding judgment on this one  
> for now.
>

Withholding judgement may be the same in effect as approving.

- samantha