Of course the second you need information, the second you are a victim in some way then of course you would demand that the authorities use all of
their power to help you. Imagine if a family member was hurt by some terrorist incident, wouldn't you expect them to find the people responsible or
would you prefer the event was stopped before it could happen by careful surveillance methods?
reply to post by impaired
This is what I am referring to. It is both assessing that we are being watched, while criticizing anyone for objecting to it. And yes, I do object
strongly to the argument, you are just not that important to care about, whilst still admitting, in an underhanded way this may be going on, but why
should you care if you aren't doing anything wrong, and surely it's for your own good, thereby the argument that if you are a victim....my point
being, we ARE being watched, and it ISN'T to protect anyone or anything, which is why I bring up the Congo. Politically, and in every other way, we
KNOW what's going on, and those in power, who ostensibly control said technology are clearly not developing nor controlling it for anyone's safety.
I could give a crap whatever you are smoking or whatever having a good time with....it is what is made out of that politically and therefore
personally to control the judgement and political spectrum,the macrocosm, of the microcosm of what you and I do in "private" and how this is used
against us individually and as a group. So, yeah, get off it, dude..... But wise up, Dude, because when they individuaize the crime and make it me,
and you are too passive and bewildered by your television and gadgets to know, down the line somewhere, the next is you.
Whenever someone's answer is, you just aren't that important, that's what I see. Yes. You are. The constitution of this country is about being an
individual and the pursuit of happiness. And that means, that to attack your privacy and pursuit of happiness, means the next individual is me,