"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Ben Franklin wrote those words over 200 years ago, and, as we reach the end of 2002, the state of important liberties around the world appears to be degenerating rapidly, particularly in the area of privacy concerns.
Excellent commentary by Lauren Weinstein in Wired on the very significant erosion of privacy laws in the past year.
Here's what I don't get - how come conservatives who become apoplectic at the thought of gun registration and other government intrusions into their lives, are all for the Patriot Act and the Homeland Security Act. It just doesn't make sense. It's big government at its intrusive worst, yet it's o.k.
It's my guess that most people have no real idea what new laws were enacted. Here's an excerpt from another Weinstein commentary:
Law enforcement interests pushed through a variety of surveillance measures, including some unrelated to terrorism, that had long been rejected as inappropriate in a free society.
Important protections related to monitoring and intelligence gathering, established after serious past abuses, were swept away with the assurance that this time the government won't abuse its powers.
Among various alarming provisions, the law opens up enormous avenues for monitoring Internet communications, without even after-the-fact notifications. Virtually any government agency at any level can initiate surveillance on flimsy grounds. No subpoenas or court oversight are required.
I find the last item of particular concern. And those who think this won't be abused are kidding themselves. Or instead think that it won't be used against them - only people who deserve to be monitored will be monitored. Well, I look forward to the day when folks discover for themselves just what this all means.
What really bothers me is that these type of new laws indicate that Osama really did achieve a great success. We're giving up so much of what makes us great as a country.
8:33:40 PM 
|
