Debunking The Dangerous "If You Have Nothing To Hide, You Have Nothing To Fear"

a reply to: SlapMonkey

I wish that I never felt that way

I have a feeling there is going to be a ground swell of NO. And in this case it will be NO, I will not be tracked, I won't be electronically stalked. I don't know if it will be a velvet NO or not, I hope for all involved it can be.

Do you see TPTB giving one inch of what they have gained up, for free? I don't. That is why I find this election so interesting, status quo against a (unproven) renegade.

a reply to: seasonal

Obama said he will be more transparent than any other admin. Where is our freedom of the press calling him out?

They use the word transparency, but don't define it. Used to be candidates in "Public" office had no right to privacy as they are elected of, by and for the people who have a right to know what they do on their behalf while in "Public" Office.

Not the "Re-Public" anymore. Not REpresenting the Public anymore.

a reply to: intrptr

Well I think when these lairs say these buss words they know exactly what they are doing. Look at the transparency, you can keep your Dr., you will save 2500$, yes we can, make America great again, ect. ect..

This is where Freedom Of The Press is supposed to tear these fluffy stories apart and inform the public of the real news. But that is hard to do when the news is owned by 10 huge corps/wealthy people.

a reply to: seasonal

Yep, they're all in cahoots!

a reply to: intrptr

Is it me or is it the voter against them, we vote for the least likely to sign bad trade deals, tax us less, promise to solve this or that. But in the end, it is all a big show, and every year this seems to get a little worse, a little less stable.
Now we have another thing on the fire, a new thing. We have our every move, every conversation and email filed and correlated.
Will either candidate make any remarkable change, I hope so, but history proves otherwise.

a reply to: seasonal

Will either candidate make any remarkable change, I hope so, but history proves otherwise.

The campaign slogans have changed from "change we can believe in", to just "forward", or "stronger together".

Meaningless and less.

a reply to: intrptr

The campaign slogans have changed from "change we can believe in", to just "forward", or "stronger together". Meaningless and less.

This is of course making us safer, how could anyone be against the patriot act, are you a commie? Now call a surveillance program Carnivore and it's easy to vote against cause it is a scary name. The politicians play us, no child left behind, patriot act, operation desert shield, operation enduring freedom etc.

And I would imagine the three letter acronyms will dismantle their systems of recording and tracking our spending and email and phone conversations.

a reply to: seasonal

You should check out this very fascinating episode of Through The Wormhole titled Is Privacy Dead? Third on down on the page.

www.sciencechannel.com...

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: seasonal

You have battered the nail firmly about the head.

There is absolutely no way to look at surveillance culture as anything else than an invasion of privacy, and one of many facets of the collapse of liberty.

Here, here, TrueBrit!

a reply to: TheSpanishArcher

You should check out this very fascinating episode of Through The Wormhole titled Is Privacy Dead? Third on down on the page. www.sciencechannel.com...

I will do, thanks.

a reply to: seasonal

Well stated.

Another reason is the hypocritical expectations of governments for its citizens to be open and transparent about all their activities while not having to abide by the same rules.

"If you have nothing to hide, then you have nothing to fear" indeed —unless you are the government of course.

a reply to: seasonal

Yes . The Interpretation of the Right of Privacy is Fluid . That should Not be the Case , but Apparently it is .......(



" The Supreme Court approaches the right to privacy and personal autonomy on a case-by-case basis. As public opinion changes regarding relationships and activities, and the boundaries of personal privacy change, largely due to social media and an atmosphere of "sharing," the definition of the right to privacy is ever-changing. "

a reply to: Zanti Misfit

The Interpretation of the Right of Privacy is Fluid .

Being fluid means it is ripe for whim and fancy of new leadership and Hope and Change. In this case I am thankful it takes so long to go through the applet courts to the big supreme court. It slows things somewhat, but then the decision can be huge. It ain't perfect.

a reply to: seasonal

The Right of Privacy is being Overcome by the Capabilities of Technology today . There is No Going Back now . Privacy in Public is almost Nonexistent . Privacy on ones Property or Home is Now being Determined by the Interpretation of the Fourth Amendment by States . Why this is the case , I do not know .





" To have standing to claim protection under the Fourth Amendment, one must first Demonstrate an Expectation of Privacy, which is not merely a Subjective Expectation in mind but an expectation that society is prepared to recognized as Reasonable under the Circumstances . "

a reply to: seasonal

I think that America, as a whole, is too apathetic to care about taking back anything that we've lost in regards to privacy--quite honestly, I feel that with many citizens, it would take the stationing of a LEO and a prosecutor inside of their home 24/7 to start even considering that enough is enough.

Ground swell of no? Well, maybe, but the underground pressure isn't quite where it needs to be to make it happen yet.

a reply to: Zanti Misfit

" The Supreme Court approaches the right to privacy and personal autonomy on a case-by-case basis. As public opinion changes regarding relationships and activities, and the boundaries of personal privacy change, largely due to social media and an atmosphere of "sharing," the definition of the right to privacy is ever-changing. "

Wow, that was revealing. "Ever changing" rights? "Case by case" basis? According to the Supreme court if you don't know or care about your rights you don't have any.

a reply to: seasonal

And I would imagine the three letter acronyms will dismantle their systems of recording and tracking our spending and email and phone conversations.

No they won't. Everything (everything) is recorded and stored in huge data centers, called Fusion centers. One in Utah...

image search

a reply to: intrptr

And I would imagine the three letter acronyms will dismantle their systems of recording and tracking our spending and email and phone conversations.

My sarcasm didn't didn't permeate the post like a full diaper like I had wished.

No they won't. Everything (everything) is recorded and stored in huge data centers, called Fusion centers. One in Utah...

Thanks for the late Halloween scare. It's all stored in there, waiting, anticipating the perfect time to be used against the people who paid for it to be built.

a reply to: seasonal

Your wit got through. The data servers are private. With built in destruct, should un authorized persons breach security. They are built to defeat military assault.

Tank obstacles

a reply to: intrptr

Fusion centers With built in destruct, should un authorized persons breach security. They are built to defeat military assault.

I would imagine that they should be for a cost according the Senate panel estimated that somewhere between $289 million and $1.4 billion in federal appropriations were spent on the fusion centers between 2003 and 2011.

Fusion centers huh, sounds like a terminator cyberdyne manufacturing plant that marries the organic with inorganic.

www.thenewamerican.com...