Snooping “for your safety.”

Snooping “for your safety.”

Yeah, it doesn’t work.
But what would I know… knowing that the data collected is being shared with other countries.

Do you believe that government is responsible for safety?
Even the EPA is only a couple decades old.  Created under Nixon… that’s telling.

O omnipotent Big Brother.

This is that “you have nowhere to hide” scenario, where the government plays God, and the supporters buy into it believing that it is good, benign or doing its job.
Or that they have gotten swept away into status quo accepting that thing known as normalcy bias, not even recognizing most of the changes made as they happen.
On the psychological level, the normalcy bias especially works its way into how bad things are, with people wanting to forget things, and so they do.

And, man, the excuses that come with it.

  • There are cameras everywhere.  But… cameras on public property isn’t really spying.
  • Where were you under Bush?  (Says the person who’ll probably do next to nothing now.)
  • Get used to it.  (Doing completely nothing now.)
  • Just don’t do anything wrong.  But government is never benign.

And “government is never benign” is not a cynical thing to say.  Time and again, history proves that to be the case.
Corruptible people with power, plain and simple— that is most certainly not benign.  Teaching practices can improve, but man does not evolve.
When there is potential of abuse, abuse will occur.  Power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Benjamin Franklin knew that the feelings of a serious moment never trump the permanent reality of consequence.

“Those who would give up essential liberty for temporary safety deserve, and will receive, neither.”

Here, I found it important to use the full quote to show that those that believe in and understand true liberty (individual liberty) are not abusive.
Franklin, and many of the other founding fathers, were abolitionists, against the status quo of the time, slavery.
It would be long before the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution would be crafted and finalized, but the initial Bill of Rights were essential to establishing the United States of America to begin with.

The Fourth Amendment was created for a boundary of respect.

“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.”

At the time, it was due to British forces invading the property of American soldiers.
But like all Amendments to the Constitution, the point is timeless.

Regardless of technology, timeless.

There is a process at which these things work, and damn well have worked.
Neutral at best, government can at best help you perform a task yourself.
If you were to act as a juror, the system would only set up the structure in the practice of due process.

And there’s the key term in the right to privacy: due process.

In a free country you, as an individual, are treated innocent until proven guilty.
Abuse always lies the other way.
When you give up your right to privacy you are saying that you should be treated guilty until proven innocent.
You open the door to harassment, blackmail, extortion… and in the 1984 sci-fi scenario, full-on manipulation.

But manipulation doesn’t require sci-fi technology.  Basic sociology alone has been used.

Here’s the reason why I’ve considered New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg a “micro-fascist”.
“Going forward, nobody is going to get everything they want.  Not Democrats, not Republicans, not me.”  Yay, rationing and outright prohibition!

You gotta watch the intake of milk, while loading his coffee with cream, it goes far beyond his calls for banning salt containers (while still being a salt addict), +16 oz. sodas in restaurants (struck down by a single judge), hamburgers… baby formula, Styrofoam (Feb. State of the City Address), certain affected family attendance (Christians, clergy) at the 9/11 memorial…
…instituting a ban on food donations to homeless shelters
…adding restrictions on hospital pain meds— because ‘pain meds are addictive’ (and rationing, perhaps).
…amounting to a more than tenfold increase in marijuana possession arrests (Marijuana Arrest Crusade).

And don’t forget the upcoming retroactive ban on gun magazines/clips having a capacity of more than seven bullets.  People don’t kill people, pieces of plastic to hold bullets kill people.

And how about unmanned drones in New York?
It’s scary, but what’s the difference whether the drone is up in the air or on the building? he responded in his weekly radio program in March.  I mean intellectually I’d have trouble making a distinction.  You can’t keep the tides from coming in.  We’re gonna have more visibility and less privacy.  I don’t see how you stop that.

(Yeah… so don’t bother standing against Fourth Amendment violations, right?)

I remember him saying something of the order of, we can’t have people thinking they can just go wherever they want, but I couldn’t get the quote…  So like a judge telling a jury to disregard their rights to things like jury nullification, I’m gonna say, disregard this paragraph.

The Current and the Next

Unmanned drones fly over farmlands without so much the consent of the farmers.

In the fight on the “War on Terror,” people have blindly sided with a conservative force that really isn’t conservative.
Full-speed ahead, the road paved I see… kind’a looks like it goes to hell.  From “good” intentions, of course.

It shows that data taken without reasonable suspicion has been used to harass citizens for quite a long time.
Not much coverage has been made that those harassed by the IRS include a ‘group’ that have been harassed throughout history: Jews.
Pro-Israel groups have been targeted by the IRS, not just groups with names containing “Patriot” or “Tea Party”… or —and this should concern you— “Constitution”.

What’s next?

How should I know?  It’s supposed to be “the most transparent administration”…
More should be disclosed on what has already happened, while other things are snuck in.
With the belief that government is good, a belief that yields the treatment of individuals guilty until proven innocent, there’s such a strategy, predicting what people are paying attention to…

Like magic, misdirection (and excuses) are what keeps crooks of politicians looking like saviors.

“But they act on behalf of your safety.”


2 thoughts on “Snooping “for your safety.”

  1. I think that the status quo is that it’s for our safety and only to catch the terrorists. But isn’t it the technology that is so huge and could be used for ill? The genie is out of the bag, they say. And, information about you is available now and could get into anyone hands, beyond government. I’m personally creeped out by the whole thing, Adam. Should I stop blogging?


    1. Of course that doesn’t mean you should stop blogging.  At the least it acts as a reminder that you shouldn’t put up personal information that could be misused— you seem to already do that… But at this point being clear matters. Neither of us are terrorists.


Thoughts? Reply:

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s