Skip to main content

View Diary: The Ghost of J. Edgar Hoover and the Internet (14 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  This (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Richard Lyon, blueoasis, chuckvw, CroneWit

    "The people benefits from all this financially and politically don not have an interest in the participation of ordinary people in planning and control.  "

    Is why I keep saying people don't get it yet.

    Facebook has been telegraphing and so has Google that its really only intrested in convincing public that the public really isn't interested in privacy rights

    That was my point of the link to the article. What the NSA is doing or has done and the President is to continue a theme that we are hearing more and more of "you only want privacy if you have something to hide."

    Its not just Mayor Bloomberg who made the comment here:

    http://www.nydailynews.com/...

    Its also happening within the judiary:

    http://www.nydailynews.com/...

    The eilites have decided for us that they are tired of worrying about o ur privacy

    Of course, when it comes to their own, we are supposed to respect it heavily and never cross any lines regarding it

    •  That is most definitely the spin. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      chuckvw

      I think as long it was about your shopping preferences being sold to advertisers, they had a very good chance of putting it across. Is is POSSIBLE that the US government getting caught with its pants down MIGHT make some difference.

      •  My honest assessment? (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Richard Lyon, chuckvw, CroneWit

        The powers that be will wait until this goes away and resume their drive to end privacy as we know it

        They are are nothing if not patient and the American public is particularly easy to manipulate by waiting the public out

        Most people don't even know this debate is going on much less what's at stake

        •  I honestly think that in a totally (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          CroneWit

          wired world notions and expectations about privacy will have to change. What they don't want is anybody outside the elite having a voice in how that happens.

          •  Although I wouldn't like it personally, I would (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Richard Lyon, chuckvw, CroneWit

            be less bothered by this if it wasn't anti-democratic

            There was an article recently on i09 about how what started out as a little "l" libertarian effort to have greater freedom for individuals has morphed into one of the most impressive anti-democratic and freedom strong known to man.

            I personally find it insulting that President Obaam was babbling recently about wanting a debate over this issue. The truth is, if there had not been a whistleblowing, we would not have known about it

            So what debate was he recently trying to have with a secret program that he never planned to tell anyone about?

            There is definitely a strong anti-democratic streak to both what's happening in the private sector and in the government

      •  Barbara Kingsolver's chlling McCarthy-era novel (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        RWood

        (Which, regrettably, I can't remember the title of) starts off very slowly as the half-American protagonist remembers his childhood.  He grows up in the home of Frida and Diego, who give shelter to Trotsky and his family.  The young man does clerical work for Trotsky as part of his responsibilities in the household.  Later, after Trotsky's death, he goes to America and finds work as a teacher.Strange tension gro as McCarthism takes hold of th ecountry.

        Then the agents are in his home, asking intrusive questions again.  'Don't I have rights?' he asks.  'Privacy protections?'  'Yes, you do,' the agent says.'but falling back on those rights during questioning only makes us wonder what you've got to hide.  Because, if you've got nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear.'

        A paraphrase, from memory.

        'If you have nothing to hide,you have nothing to fear.  If you object to providing information, you must have something to hide.  If you have something to hide, we have to investigate you further' is my recollectio of the agent's train of thought.

        Hope this is not off-topic.  Bruh1's comments brought it to mind.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site