more on Who they are spying on

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

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 EDT
>
> I'm tempted to pack it in.  It appears that a substantial  
> percentage of the
> members 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.

>   In
> essence, 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 to
> talk 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/