Who ever thought there could (could) be a class war fought over privacy? Since this means some Americans do get official privacy protections (many also get to walk through TSA checkpoints unmolested), we now know there is now a two-tiered society in the US that has been engineered from the top down to create this state of affairs based on the 4th Amendment.
I dunno, I think the writing has been on the wall for quite some time that privacy is another incorporeal thing to which access is tiered based on class. Society just has a way of dismissing voices of apprehension, typically as paranoids and/or with libertarian-ish scolds for as much as floating concerns with machinations of non-government entities.
The thing is, privacy doesn't have to be incorporeal, there can be laws passed that either explicitly prohibit privacy invasions or legalize behavior that can currently be used for probable cause, reasonable suspicion, or actual charges (linking to content hosted elsewhere, for instance). To remove the ability to exercise power based on certain things is the strategy here. You can defund the NSA, which I support, but you can also make it so that certain things do not even qualify as evidence of wrongdoing.
Keep in mind that the state of privacy in the Obama administration's "three-hops" strategy allows them to mine the internet and telephone data of anybody who calls a cable company or telephony provider, provided someone suspected of talking to someone suspected of talking to a suspected terrorist has called any of those providers. Which is basically everybody.
Comments
Who ever thought there could (could) be a class war fought over privacy? Since this means some Americans do get official privacy protections (many also get to walk through TSA checkpoints unmolested), we now know there is now a two-tiered society in the US that has been engineered from the top down to create this state of affairs based on the 4th Amendment.
There's only one class war: the haves vs. the have nots. Everything else is a diversion.
I think there's something to be said for "have," historically referrering to tangible assets.
I dunno, I think the writing has been on the wall for quite some time that privacy is another incorporeal thing to which access is tiered based on class. Society just has a way of dismissing voices of apprehension, typically as paranoids and/or with libertarian-ish scolds for as much as floating concerns with machinations of non-government entities.
The thing is, privacy doesn't have to be incorporeal, there can be laws passed that either explicitly prohibit privacy invasions or legalize behavior that can currently be used for probable cause, reasonable suspicion, or actual charges (linking to content hosted elsewhere, for instance). To remove the ability to exercise power based on certain things is the strategy here. You can defund the NSA, which I support, but you can also make it so that certain things do not even qualify as evidence of wrongdoing.
Keep in mind that the state of privacy in the Obama administration's "three-hops" strategy allows them to mine the internet and telephone data of anybody who calls a cable company or telephony provider, provided someone suspected of talking to someone suspected of talking to a suspected terrorist has called any of those providers. Which is basically everybody.