Posted on 06/12/2013 4:00:23 AM PDT by Kaslin
This week, Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., said the National Security Agency's data mining violates our Fourth Amendment right to be "secure in their persons, houses, papers" and is "tyranny that our founders rebelled against." Good for him.
In an op-ed, he adds, "We fought a revolution over issues like generalized warrants, where soldiers would go from house to house, searching anything they liked," and wonders "which parts of the Constitution this government will next consider negotiable." Good for him. I'm glad at least one senator reminds Big Government that our Constitution limits federal power.
And many libertarians are furious at this latest intrusion of "Big Brother."
So what's wrong with me? I just can't get that worked up about it.
I know Big Data now in NSA computers probably includes my phone calls. (I hope it's just time, duration, location and recipients, not my words, too, but I'm not sure.)
I know the snooping may be unnecessary. Government's claim that it prevents terror is weak: Officials say a terrorist was caught, but New York City police say he was caught via other methods. I'm skeptical about the very claim that any terribly important "secrets" are held by unhappy 29-year-olds and 4.8 million other people (that's how many Americans hold security clearance for classified material).
So it's invasive, probably illegal and maybe useless. I ought to be very angry. But I'm not. Why?
I need to keep thinking about this issue, but for now, two reasons:
1. Terrorists do want to murder us. If the NSA is halfway competent, Big Data should help detect plots.
2. My electronic privacy has already been utterly shredded by Google, Amazon, YouTube and so on.
They know with whom I talk, what interests me and how much time I spend doing this or that. They creep me out with targeted ads. How did they know I want that?! Oh, right ... I spent an hour searching ...
Then I go outside in New York City, where 16 cameras record me on my way to work.
Greedy lawyers can subpoena my private records. My employer has a right to read my emails.
My privacy is already blown.
I'm angrier about other things Big Government does in the name of keeping me safe: forcing me to wear safety gear, limiting where I may go, stripping me at airports, forcing me to pay $2,300 for more military than we need.
Actually, $2,300 is the average Americans pay for our military. I pay more. The total for all of us is more than $700 billon a year, which is, as Chris Preble of the Cato Institute pointed out on my TV show, "more than we spent at the peak of the Cold War ... fighting the Soviet Union."
The danger was greater then, when we had a nuclear Soviet Union threatening to "bury us."
Much of America's defense spending goes to defend our allies in Europe and Asia. They spend less because we spend more.
"We are suckers," said Preble. "I don't blame them. If I were in their situation, if someone else was offering to pay for my security, I'd let them do it."
And it's not clear that we do what we do efficiently. The U.S. Department of Defense is prone to the same sorts of inefficiency that plagues other parts of government. The department's brownie recipe is 26 pages long.
Military officials say al-Qaida has been weakened. Iran (someday) may build a nuclear bomb, but we managed to deter China and Russia when they had thousands.
Some people want the U.S. military to police the world: Contain China, transform failed states, chase terrorists, train foreign militaries, protect sea lanes, protect oil supplies, stop genocide, protect refugees, maintain bases in allied countries, police our southern border, stop drug trafficking and spread good through humanitarian missions. The list is endless, which is the problem.
The U.S. military can't be everywhere. And we can't hand the government unlimited power and unlimited money every time a potential crisis looms.
We must remain on guard against threats. But bankruptcy may be the greatest threat.
Like that one in Boston?
Obama is going after Americans, even while
yesterday in his home Indonesia, al Qaeda bragged
it now had 20,000 MANPADs (courtesy of Obama and Clinton).
Snowden just showed us that any computer nerd with minimal security clearance can do as he wishes with data that the government shouldn’t be collecting in the first place.
He’s not a super genius spy, he’s a computer nerd like millions of others. Our government is creating a massive data mall that makes all of us vulnerable to any computer nerd who actually wishes to do us harm.
LLS
> Obama is going after Americans, even while
yesterday in his home Indonesia, al Qaeda bragged
it now had 20,000 MANPADs (courtesy of Obama and Clinton).
I fail to see how the Left cant grasp the concept that 0 is a traitor.He has committed so many acts that would have been considered treason if he were to have white skin it defies comprehension.
Big Data is one stop shopping for hackers that actually want to do us real harm. (Not to mention the danger posed to individuals)
Gretchen Carlson on FOX just declared twitter to be “Safe for terrorists” because they refuse to take part in the data mining. I guess she just committed treason too.
The keyword is competent
> Gretchen Carlson on FOX just declared twitter to be “Safe for terrorists” because they refuse to take part in the data mining. I guess she just committed treason too.
The difference is state of mind while committing the acts; in her case there is no reason to believe there is intent to do harm. 0 appears to have intent.
In her case it just proves that she’s a moron.
I don’t have security cameras in my home for the feds to monitor. That apparently makes my home safe for terrorists.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.