Donald Kerr, principal deputy director of national intelligence, wants Americans to redefine privacy.
Privacy no longer can mean anonymity, says Donald Kerr, the principal deputy director of national intelligence. Instead, it should mean that government and businesses properly safeguard people’s private communications and financial information.
And don’t they have a stellar track record at doing just that?
The most contentious issue in the new legislation is whether to shield telecommunications companies from civil lawsuits for allegedly giving the government access to people’s private e-mails and phone calls without a FISA court order between 2001 and 2007.
The central witness in a California lawsuit against AT&T says the government is vacuuming up billions of e-mails and phone calls as they pass through an AT&T switching station in San Francisco, California.
The thug in the White House has promised to veto any bill that does not grant Telcos immunity from suits such as this one.
Kurt Opsahl from the EFF stated, “There is something fundamentally different from the government having information about you than private parties,” he said. “We shouldn’t have to give people the choice between taking advantage of modern communication tools and sacrificing their privacy.”
“It’s just another ‘trust us, we’re the government.”
Thanks, KB
Are you sure that’s not a photo of an NFL official checking out a challenged call?
“Privacy no longer can mean anonymity, says Donald Kerr, the principal deputy director of national intelligence. Instead, it should mean that government and businesses properly safeguard people’s private communications and financial information.”
Oh yeah? I’ll tell you what, buddy. You give me and my business all your private communications and financial information every minute of every day of the week and then I’ll think about giving you mine.
what the heck is happening?
i thought i woke up in america this morning?
-s
#2 I’ll think about giving you mine.
Read that again Cinaedh, they already have yours, you have no say in it. What, did you think you lived in a free country where you had a voice?
#1 “Are you sure that’s not a photo of an NFL official checking out a challenged call?”
what makes you think that? is he taking a bribe?
On second thought, that’s just a flasher looking at pr0n.
just relax everyone, the government is your protector, you can trust the government in all things, ask any conservative they’ll tell you: the government needs no checks and/or balances.
you will only be safe if the government is given absolute power.
besides, questioning authority is unpatriotic, and you do want to be patriotic don’t you? you don’t have anything to hide, right?
you have nothing to fear.
here, have some kool-aid
We’re from the government and we need to take away your liberties in order to safeguard them.
Meanwhile give us all of your account numbers and passwords so we can safeguard those too.
I’ll reconsider my definition of privacy when the OED redefines privacy.
just 13 more months
just 13 more months
just 13 more months
just 13 more months
just 13 more months
just 13 more months
just 13 more months
just 13 more months
I agree. Privacy does NOT mean anonymity.
I support keeping conversations within a home private (absent
a court order?) but see no reason that phone calls and email
should be considered within those 4 walls.
The only reason not to be for such monitoring is fear of being caught
for criminal activities==or the misuse of information gained by those
doing the collecting?
Can we trust our government not to misuse the info???
Nevermind.
If they want to see my privates, I’ll show them.
#11 – I find myself, bizarrely in agreement with.. NappyHeadedHo
Since no one should have anything anything to hide, I’d like nude photos of every hot babe out there over the age of eighteen. Aww, the hell with that, naked photos of EVERYBODY for EVERYONE!!!!! That OK with you, Mr Kerr? I thought not….
#13 – I find myself, bizarrely in agreement with.. GetSmart…
What do we want?!?!?!
Naked Pictures of EVERYBODY!
When do we want them?!?!?!
NOW!
When Kerr said “Privacy no longer can mean anonymity,” it just shows that once again, our guardian angels want to redefine basic terms so that they don’t have to relinquish use of a favorite advertising slogan. They want to be able to say that “Americans’ privacy is protected,” but it just won’t mean the same thing anymore. Doesn’t it seem a bit cowardly to change the meaning of a word, rather than come out and admit that they want to take more of our privacy away?
It’s not the Liberty Bell itself that has become most symbolic of America, but the crack in the bell.
>>The only reason not to be for such monitoring is fear of being
>>caught for criminal activities
You could make the same argument about random police stops on the highway with a car search. Or of unauthorized wiretaps on your phone, spy cams in your bedroom, reading your incoming and outgoing mail.
If you’ve got nothing to hide, what’s the problem? Right Bobbolini?
#13, GetSmart
(looking down)
Are you sure you want photos of everyone ???
You do realize that you will need one of them fancy teloe photoe lenses to see iHotAir(YOP) like Angel wants to see him. You’ll want one of those panorama lenses for me.
Knock Knock:
We’re from the Government
No thanks, we have all the government we need!
Favorite line from ‘The Tick’ comics
I thought the government was supposed to work for the people, not the other way around. Where are we living, in the U.S. of A. or the U.S.S.R? I’d still rather live here by far, but the gap between the two is closing rapidly.
Big Brother? Privacy? Har.
Better watch out for that nosy neighbor 1st –
http://cagematch.dvorak.org/index.php/topic,2818.0.html