Interesting People mailing list archives
more on Who they are spying on
From: David Farber <dave () farber net>
Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 08:08:17 -0400
Begin forwarded message: From: Gene Spafford <spaf () cerias purdue edu> Date: June 9, 2006 9:25:41 PM EDT To: dave () farber net Cc: ip () v2 listbox com Subject: Re: [IP] more on Who they are spying on
From: h_bray () globe com Date: June 9, 2006 4:35:24 PM EDTI'm tempted to pack it in. It appears that a substantial percentage of themembers of this list quite sincerely believe that we're in no danger.
No, I think you are misinterpreting the response. Many of us not only believe there is a danger, but know it. However, it is also the case that many of us believe that unchecked surveillance by the government is ALSO a threat. The question is one of balance -- which threat is worse to our fundamental values and way of life? Some believe the threat of terrorists to be a greater threat than government snooping. Some don't. Some believe that photographers of naked people, homosexuals, an occasional flag burner, Jews, blacks, Mexicans and Democrats are all threats to the US and justify monitoring to identify and expose them. Hopefully, the majority of people do not believe the same. Don't be quick to dismiss that as sophistry -- we have already seen that many in the Senate and House believe it is more important to try to amend the Constitution restricting or punishing some of those people than it is to investigate whether there has been improper surveillance by the government. Clearly, they think those are significant threats to our way of life. Not all of us agree.
Again, it is a question of balancing risks and values.
Inessence, they want the US government to do little or nothing about Islamist terrorism. And with those who think this way, there's really not much totalk about.
It is not a binary issue around surveillance -- it is around oversight, and scope. I imagine that the vast majority of people want to do something about Islamic terrorists. However, *what* they want done, and *how much* they are willing to sacrifice, those are key issues.
You appear to have made some judgments whereby you value government claims of your safety (and of the safety of your personal information) to be sufficient to surrender some of your civil and legal rights in exchange. You are certainly welcome to make that decision. However, you shouldn't be surprised that not everyone agrees with that position, and that there are many who do not want that decision imposed on them.
You might stay, but many of us would choose to walk away from Omelas (cf. <http://www.cbe.wwu.edu/dunn/rprnts.omelas.pdf>).
------------------------------------- You are subscribed as lists-ip () insecure org To manage your subscription, go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/
Current thread:
- more on Who they are spying on David Farber (Jun 08)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- more on Who they are spying on David Farber (Jun 09)
- more on Who they are spying on David Farber (Jun 09)
- more on Who they are spying on David Farber (Jun 10)