Once again, the NSA, keeping us safe....
Of course, we're not allowed to know where they are, who they call, from which telephone number, how often, any of that. But they're allowed to know that about us. Without telling us. And to keep the information for a very long time (Oh, didn't we erase those records? Darn.)
My sister-in-law tells me that if I knew the things she knows about possible terror threats (she's an executive at FEMA), I would be aghast. Probably true. She believes this means I should trust the government without reservation, at which point I stop talking with her, because I like her, and wouldn't want to use the words that come to mind. All I know is, if we knew how often grubby people (but with pure hearts, they swear) are peeking through the keyhole, we'd be horrified and enraged. So, of course, they keep it secret. For our own good, they swear.
It comes down to whether we can trust people who aren't clearly accountable and punishable. When it comes to things like this, I'm guessing not.
Do we need this kind of snooping? I think so. I do believe what my sister in law says. I am sure that if I knew of the actual threats, I'd be horrified. Even given that paranoid people see threats where none nationally exist, I'd be horrified. But that belief does not mean that I am willing to give free, unfettered access to my life over to people who feel that they alone can judge what they should have access to know. They need responsible oversight. I would be perfectly willing to trust senior politicians to look over this information, these procedures and determine if it's warranted - except that lately, the senior politicians seem much more interested in protecting themselves than in protecting me. They'll give me up in a heartbeat, for, you know, the good of the country.
There's a quote people like to use, to the effect that those who are willing to give up some liberty in order to gain some security deserve neither. I don't agree with that. I think that some snooping, some watching, is necessary. But without clear accountability? No. Even the law is not above the law. Or, at least, it shouldn't be.
2 comments:
I recommend the book
Night watch
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Atlee_Phillips
which should give you pause.
Remember, the things that Phillips actually talks about are the "de-classified things". Little details like overthrowing the government of Chile and Quatamala, the Bay of Pigs (which didn't work but should have).
With the scope of American covert activity in the world, a few diverted emails in the US is pretty small potatoes.
Although it was overblown, I think that Colonel Jessup's comment about the truth was valid. If Obama was to tell me and us honestly what the threats to my country are -- and able to distinguish between paranoia and actual threats, if that's possible - I think I'd have a meltdown. We elect these people to handle that sort of thing, and to keep us isolated from it. We want to trust, if not the people doing the handling, then the people who hired them. Having a little problem with that right now.
Yeah, it is 'just a few'...million. But at what point does it become unacceptable?
Post a Comment