The Case Against Broad Government Surveillance

For a while I thought I might be coming at the matter of government surveillance from a different perspective then a lot of people. I read comments from others who say they are a little concerned but they say they just always figure the government is listening in anyway.

I'm a product of the Vietnam generation and we came to learn that President Nixon had agents going to peace rallies and document participants. Of course their efforts were remedial by surveillance standards today but the fact is they kept file on people they considered a threat to this country because they exercised their constitutional right to assembly to protest our involvement in Vietnam. Think what he could have done with the technology available today? I'm relatively confident that Nixon was so paranoid of average Americans that he would be salivating over what the government is doing today to you and I.

I was both encouraged and discouraged by a PEN America survey of American writers that found 85% are worried about government surveillance and 73% have never been more worried about privacy rights and freedom of the press as they are today. The encouraging part is writers are paying attention. This is a good thing.  Of course the concern doesn't alleviate the erosion of privacy. And beside from the concern there is another down side... it is impacting how writers conduct themselves.

The PEN survey indicates the 28% or nearly a third have curtailed or avoided social media activities and another 12% have seriously considered doing the same, all because of the threat of surveillance. And nearly one quarter (24%) have deliberately  avoided certain topics in phone and email conversations. Another 9% have seriously considered this avenue.

One chilling effect this is having on writers is 16%  have avoided writing or speaking  about a particular topic. Another 11% seriously considered it.

The report goes on....

• 16% refrained from conducting searches on the Internet or visiting websites on topics they consider controversial.
• 13% have taken steps to disguise or cover their digital footprints. 
• 3% have actually declined opportunities to meet in person or electronically with persons how might be deemed security threats by the government. 

In each of these instances there were measurable numbers who seriously considered taking these same drastic steps.

It troubles me that writers, be they journalists or or in the literary arts are finding themselves self-censoring over fear from our own government.

The 4th Amendment, freedom of the press is necessary to assure the survival of the republic against the kinds controls the brought to power fascist governments in Germany, the Soviet Union and China in years past. These are some of the same kinds of extremes we are seeing in many middle-eastern countries as well.

I am not convinced that a more secure America is one in which we are all under the watchful eyes of the government. That is an awesome power and one that can very easily lead to dangers in our democracy right here at home.

The press, the arts were all under watchful eyes in  Nazi Germany. The government controlled the flow of information and yes even the arts. Knowledge is a powerful freedom for people. The control of knowledge too is powerful but in subverts the liberties of people.

Md. Police Listed Green Group As Terrorist : NPR

Md. Police Listed Green Group As Terrorist : NPR: "Nation
Md. Police Listed Green Group As Terrorist
by Libby Lewis
Audio for this story will be available at approx. 7:00 p.m. ET
All Things Considered, October 24, 2008 · Three staff members of a Chesapeake environmental group were surprised to learn they were spied on by Maryland State Police and named as suspected terrorists on a state list. The state police has acknowledged it spied on anti-death penalty and anti-war activists."


Gee you just never know do you. So many terrorists and so little time.
We went through this kind of shit during the Nixon years. It gets old.

IMMUNITY FIGHT A VICTORY FOR GOVERNMENT LAWLESSNESS

When the Bush Administration tapped private phone lines with the aid of phone companies but without any court order authorizing the wiretaps, it set into motion a series of challenges for violating the privacy rights of millions of Americans. That battle ended today when the Senate voted in favor of the new FISA bill today by a 69-28. Barack Obama joined every Senate Republican by voting in favor of it. Sadly my own Democratic Senator from Missouri, Claire McCaskill also sold out to Bush and the phone companies voting for the final bill with immunity for phone companies that have already provided private information from American citizens to the Bush administration without court order. Sen. Hillary Clinton had the courage to voted against it.

Earlier amendment to pass the bill without immunity failed - Obama supporting that effort while McCaskill again voted the Bush & phone company line.

Error Gave F.B.I. Unauthorized Access to E-Mail

WASHINGTON — A technical glitch gave the F.B.I. access to the e-mail messages from an entire computer network — perhaps hundreds of accounts or more — instead of simply the lone e-mail address that was approved by a secret intelligence court as part of a national security investigation, according to an internal report of the 2006 episode.


A report in 2006 by the Justice Department inspector general found more than 100 violations of federal wiretap law in the two prior years by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, many of them considered technical and inadvertent. {and the ones that were not technical and inadvertent where what?}

Source: New York Times - February 17, 2008