Privacy is a Moot Issue

Sonny Clark

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2014
Messages
51,089
Reaction score
5,911
Points
1,870
Location
Gadsden Alabama
[ This is a piece that I wrote on 5/5/2006. In my opinion, it's still relevant today. ]


Privacy Is A Moot Issue


The war on terrorism has seemingly given our government carte blanche when it comes to removing citizens’ right to privacy. The government is now using the threat of “terrorists’ acts”, and the guise of national security to invade citizens’ privacy. Since we’ll “forever” live under the threat of a terrorist attack, the government can use this excuse “forever”. What this means is that citizens’ right to privacy is a thing of the past, it’s gone.


The “usual and customary” grounds, for which the invasion of privacy was permitted, are now superceded by national security concerns related to terrorism. How can we gain the right to privacy through war, and lose that right without a war? Did we just roll over and let our right be taken away without a fight?


It is believed by many that our constitution was, and has been, misinterpreted on this issue, as well as on other important issues. If the constitution is not the basis, the foundation for which we get our rights, then where do they come from? Surely our government can’t give and take them with each new administration or with each new military engagement on foreign soil. Where is the point at which we refuse to give up the basic right to privacy?


The main point here is not so much our right to privacy, but our rights in general. Who is the guardian of our rights, and should those rights be protected from alteration and amendment if not to make them more powerful in meaning? If we abandon the very principles intended to govern our nation, then what form of government would we live under? This would certainly not be a country in which citizens would be allowed to exercise the right of free speech.


If by using fear, we can justify giving up basic rights, then shouldn’t the fear of a society without those rights be just as frightening? Fear of an attack by terrorists could be used to justify almost any steps taken by our government, all in the name of national security. The constitution could be ignored, by-passed, and purposely misinterpreted if our government is allowed to stand on the belief that unrestricted executive power is justified during times of global unrest.


Why now? The threats to our security are not new, by any means. Although one could argue that it’s a new kind of threat, removing or bypassing certain rights doesn’t guarantee an attack won’t happen. We’re seeing an administration hell-bent on complete control. We’re seeing a power game in Washington, the likes this nation has never seen. It’s amazing that more attempts to undermine and alter the constitution haven’t been made during the past five years.


Information relating to internet activity, cell phone use, home phone use, personal mail in your home mail box, along with your bank accounts and credit card activity can be monitored. Also, social clubs and organizations you belong to, religious events and functions you attend, and special training schools you may attend are all subject to government monitoring and access. Uncle Sam is watching.


Our rights molded and gave character to this nation, why not hold them dear and protect them? We, the citizens of this country, have an obligation to ensure those rights given to us, will be here for future generations. The only power that should be in Washington is the power of the people, period. The only way to protect our rights is to make sure those in Washington understand that their power comes from us, you and I.
 

Shikica

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 7, 2015
Messages
116
Reaction score
16
Points
46
Excellent article. I might add however that it's not simply a matter of citizens realizing how important it is to have control of all their rights. We all know about PRISM and that the government has been spying on us for decades with the help of corporations and will continue to do so. However we aren't doing anything about it, why? Because everyone is so complacent and comfortable in their everyday life that they don't care about anything except for their simple pleasures in life.

That mentality will need to be destroyed before the type of change that the article talks about will take place.
 
OP
Sonny Clark

Sonny Clark

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2014
Messages
51,089
Reaction score
5,911
Points
1,870
Location
Gadsden Alabama
Excellent article. I might add however that it's not simply a matter of citizens realizing how important it is to have control of all their rights. We all know about PRISM and that the government has been spying on us for decades with the help of corporations and will continue to do so. However we aren't doing anything about it, why? Because everyone is so complacent and comfortable in their everyday life that they don't care about anything except for their simple pleasures in life.

That mentality will need to be destroyed before the type of change that the article talks about will take place.
I totally agree 110%. I have mentioned the same thing several times in the past. People basically live in their own little world, and rarely escape their comfort bubble to see what's going on in the rest of the world. Many have no idea as to what actually influences their daily lives.
 

Dante

On leave
Joined
Dec 1, 2008
Messages
52,462
Reaction score
3,366
Points
1,825
Location
On leave
[ This is a piece that I wrote on 5/5/2006. In my opinion, it's still relevant today. ]


Privacy Is A Moot Issue


The war on terrorism has seemingly given our government carte blanche when it comes to removing citizens’ right to privacy. The government is now using the threat of “terrorists’ acts”, and the guise of national security to invade citizens’ privacy. Since we’ll “forever” live under the threat of a terrorist attack, the government can use this excuse “forever”. What this means is that citizens’ right to privacy is a thing of the past, it’s gone.


...
Let us take this on one bit at a time.

seemingly: "The war on terrorism has seemingly given our government carte blanche when it comes to removing citizens’ right to privacy." -- not a very good argument without backing it up with facts

please provide concrete examples: "The government is now using the threat of “terrorists’ acts”, and the guise of national security to invade citizens’ privacy."
 
OP
Sonny Clark

Sonny Clark

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2014
Messages
51,089
Reaction score
5,911
Points
1,870
Location
Gadsden Alabama
[ This is a piece that I wrote on 5/5/2006. In my opinion, it's still relevant today. ]


Privacy Is A Moot Issue


The war on terrorism has seemingly given our government carte blanche when it comes to removing citizens’ right to privacy. The government is now using the threat of “terrorists’ acts”, and the guise of national security to invade citizens’ privacy. Since we’ll “forever” live under the threat of a terrorist attack, the government can use this excuse “forever”. What this means is that citizens’ right to privacy is a thing of the past, it’s gone.


...
Let us take this on one bit at a time.

seemingly: "The war on terrorism has seemingly given our government carte blanche when it comes to removing citizens’ right to privacy." -- not a very good argument without backing it up with facts

please provide concrete examples: "The government is now using the threat of “terrorists’ acts”, and the guise of national security to invade citizens’ privacy."
Lets try e-mails, phone calls, internet activity, cameras everywhere, airport searches ( passengers ), illegal wire taps, surveillance, snail mail, checking groups and organization one is associated with, bank accounts, any special training such as pilot training, purchases that could be used to make explosives, watching friends and relatives of those under suspicion, background checks, a watch list for pass ports, donations abroad, travel activity, etc. etc. etc.
 

Dante

On leave
Joined
Dec 1, 2008
Messages
52,462
Reaction score
3,366
Points
1,825
Location
On leave
[ This is a piece that I wrote on 5/5/2006. In my opinion, it's still relevant today. ]


Privacy Is A Moot Issue


The war on terrorism has seemingly given our government carte blanche when it comes to removing citizens’ right to privacy. The government is now using the threat of “terrorists’ acts”, and the guise of national security to invade citizens’ privacy. Since we’ll “forever” live under the threat of a terrorist attack, the government can use this excuse “forever”. What this means is that citizens’ right to privacy is a thing of the past, it’s gone.


...
Let us take this on one bit at a time.

seemingly: "The war on terrorism has seemingly given our government carte blanche when it comes to removing citizens’ right to privacy." -- not a very good argument without backing it up with facts

please provide concrete examples: "The government is now using the threat of “terrorists’ acts”, and the guise of national security to invade citizens’ privacy."
Lets try e-mails, phone calls, internet activity, cameras everywhere, airport searches ( passengers ), illegal wire taps, surveillance, snail mail, checking groups and organization one is associated with, bank accounts, any special training such as pilot training, purchases that could be used to make explosives, watching friends and relatives of those under suspicion, background checks, a watch list for pass ports, donations abroad, travel activity, etc. etc. etc.
You think your emails are your private property? Hmm...

I agree we have voluntarily given up liberties for the illusion of safety and protections. We do it with credit card info. We log onto sites that collect data, data easily shared for a price. It's all mostly out there in the public.

You have not listed specific cases. I always thought the government was doing more than asswipes like snowden say they are. We asked for security after 9/11. I do not see the government being as big a threat as paranoids like you do. I believe it is more likely to be Brave New World than 1984. It is happening as we type.

you're a tool
 

Dante

On leave
Joined
Dec 1, 2008
Messages
52,462
Reaction score
3,366
Points
1,825
Location
On leave
Aldous Huxley said something I've thought about for a while. He gave a talk addressing the possible dictatorship of the engineer class/technology
 

HenryBHough

Platinum Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2011
Messages
30,923
Reaction score
6,935
Points
1,140
Location
Oak Grove, Massachusetts
This is 2015.

We're in the seventh year of the rule of Our Lord Messiah, The Great Saviour Barack Soetoro.

There are no rights.

There are only privileges subject to withdrawal sans notice.

WTF, were you all asleep?
 
Last edited:

Dante

On leave
Joined
Dec 1, 2008
Messages
52,462
Reaction score
3,366
Points
1,825
Location
On leave
This is 2015.

We're in the seventh year of the rule of Our Lord Messian, The Great Saviour Barack Soetoro.

There are no rights.

There are only privileges subject to withdrawal sans notice.

WTF, were you all asleep?
Ok Chicken Little

:cuckoo:
 

Delta4Embassy

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2013
Messages
25,745
Reaction score
3,033
Points
280
Location
Earth
[ This is a piece that I wrote on 5/5/2006. In my opinion, it's still relevant today. ]


Privacy Is A Moot Issue


The war on terrorism has seemingly given our government carte blanche when it comes to removing citizens’ right to privacy. The government is now using the threat of “terrorists’ acts”, and the guise of national security to invade citizens’ privacy. Since we’ll “forever” live under the threat of a terrorist attack, the government can use this excuse “forever”. What this means is that citizens’ right to privacy is a thing of the past, it’s gone.


The “usual and customary” grounds, for which the invasion of privacy was permitted, are now superceded by national security concerns related to terrorism. How can we gain the right to privacy through war, and lose that right without a war? Did we just roll over and let our right be taken away without a fight?


It is believed by many that our constitution was, and has been, misinterpreted on this issue, as well as on other important issues. If the constitution is not the basis, the foundation for which we get our rights, then where do they come from? Surely our government can’t give and take them with each new administration or with each new military engagement on foreign soil. Where is the point at which we refuse to give up the basic right to privacy?


The main point here is not so much our right to privacy, but our rights in general. Who is the guardian of our rights, and should those rights be protected from alteration and amendment if not to make them more powerful in meaning? If we abandon the very principles intended to govern our nation, then what form of government would we live under? This would certainly not be a country in which citizens would be allowed to exercise the right of free speech.


If by using fear, we can justify giving up basic rights, then shouldn’t the fear of a society without those rights be just as frightening? Fear of an attack by terrorists could be used to justify almost any steps taken by our government, all in the name of national security. The constitution could be ignored, by-passed, and purposely misinterpreted if our government is allowed to stand on the belief that unrestricted executive power is justified during times of global unrest.


Why now? The threats to our security are not new, by any means. Although one could argue that it’s a new kind of threat, removing or bypassing certain rights doesn’t guarantee an attack won’t happen. We’re seeing an administration hell-bent on complete control. We’re seeing a power game in Washington, the likes this nation has never seen. It’s amazing that more attempts to undermine and alter the constitution haven’t been made during the past five years.


Information relating to internet activity, cell phone use, home phone use, personal mail in your home mail box, along with your bank accounts and credit card activity can be monitored. Also, social clubs and organizations you belong to, religious events and functions you attend, and special training schools you may attend are all subject to government monitoring and access. Uncle Sam is watching.


Our rights molded and gave character to this nation, why not hold them dear and protect them? We, the citizens of this country, have an obligation to ensure those rights given to us, will be here for future generations. The only power that should be in Washington is the power of the people, period. The only way to protect our rights is to make sure those in Washington understand that their power comes from us, you and I.
Privacy's moot if most are on social media of some sort. You signed away your right to privacy to be there.
 

Dante

On leave
Joined
Dec 1, 2008
Messages
52,462
Reaction score
3,366
Points
1,825
Location
On leave
[ This is a piece that I wrote on 5/5/2006. In my opinion, it's still relevant today. ]


Privacy Is A Moot Issue


The war on terrorism has seemingly given our government carte blanche when it comes to removing citizens’ right to privacy. The government is now using the threat of “terrorists’ acts”, and the guise of national security to invade citizens’ privacy. Since we’ll “forever” live under the threat of a terrorist attack, the government can use this excuse “forever”. What this means is that citizens’ right to privacy is a thing of the past, it’s gone.


The “usual and customary” grounds, for which the invasion of privacy was permitted, are now superceded by national security concerns related to terrorism. How can we gain the right to privacy through war, and lose that right without a war? Did we just roll over and let our right be taken away without a fight?


It is believed by many that our constitution was, and has been, misinterpreted on this issue, as well as on other important issues. If the constitution is not the basis, the foundation for which we get our rights, then where do they come from? Surely our government can’t give and take them with each new administration or with each new military engagement on foreign soil. Where is the point at which we refuse to give up the basic right to privacy?


The main point here is not so much our right to privacy, but our rights in general. Who is the guardian of our rights, and should those rights be protected from alteration and amendment if not to make them more powerful in meaning? If we abandon the very principles intended to govern our nation, then what form of government would we live under? This would certainly not be a country in which citizens would be allowed to exercise the right of free speech.


If by using fear, we can justify giving up basic rights, then shouldn’t the fear of a society without those rights be just as frightening? Fear of an attack by terrorists could be used to justify almost any steps taken by our government, all in the name of national security. The constitution could be ignored, by-passed, and purposely misinterpreted if our government is allowed to stand on the belief that unrestricted executive power is justified during times of global unrest.


Why now? The threats to our security are not new, by any means. Although one could argue that it’s a new kind of threat, removing or bypassing certain rights doesn’t guarantee an attack won’t happen. We’re seeing an administration hell-bent on complete control. We’re seeing a power game in Washington, the likes this nation has never seen. It’s amazing that more attempts to undermine and alter the constitution haven’t been made during the past five years.


Information relating to internet activity, cell phone use, home phone use, personal mail in your home mail box, along with your bank accounts and credit card activity can be monitored. Also, social clubs and organizations you belong to, religious events and functions you attend, and special training schools you may attend are all subject to government monitoring and access. Uncle Sam is watching.


Our rights molded and gave character to this nation, why not hold them dear and protect them? We, the citizens of this country, have an obligation to ensure those rights given to us, will be here for future generations. The only power that should be in Washington is the power of the people, period. The only way to protect our rights is to make sure those in Washington understand that their power comes from us, you and I.
Privacy's moot if most are on social media of some sort. You signed away your right to privacy to be there.
ain't a pretty picture
 

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top