living in italia.
It has been a while since American politics has made it’s way into my mind enough to sit down and write about it. A year ago I could have written novels. But for the past six months all I have been thinking about is Italy. First, preparing for the news, and now just getting used to living here have been taking all my brain power. Plus, a New York Times is about €6, so there is no way I’m buying one. I suppose it is good though. I have been able to clear my mind. But I have signed us up for our absentee ballots, which I have no doubt will not be counted, but we’ll mail them in anyhow.
But yesterday I did go to NYtimes.com and read a few articles. The first letting the American public know that Bush had successfully legalized his warrant-less wiretapping program. Now, all international calls and emails can be listened in on without a warrant. They legitimized it by saying, basically, that they aren’t listening to the American citizen, but the foreign person on the other line. So if you call or email your friend in London, they can listen and intercept and it is 100% legal. It essentially says that an American does not have the right to talk to a non-American (or a friend or relative on vacation!) without possibly being listened to.
I know what the argument against me would be: “I’ve got nothing to hide! Anyone who doesn’t want people listening has something to hide.” It has nothing to do with having something to hide or not. It has to do with basic liberties and the “slippery slope” (G.W.’s favorite term these days) it takes us down. Free and uninhibited speech is an essential part of a free political system. It is the idea behind removing rights that is the issue here. Any invasion of privacy is a removal of an essential American liberty, and any removal of one of these essential liberties puts the state of our Union in danger.
“He who is willing to give up freedom or liberty in the name of safety deserves neither freedom nor liberty.” - Benjamin Franklin
I’ve said it before and I will say it again... there are risks that come with living in a free nation. The safest places to live are places with strong, invasive government systems, where the ruling authority knows what is going on in everyone’s lives and exerts control over its people.
This is a whole other issue to get into, but we all want a sense of safety, and in short, I don’t think that starting needless wars that lead to the deaths of up to 500,000 innocent civilians, and angering the entire world is the way to be at peace with ourselves and the world. Living life that way will give you as much peace as going out an killing all the people you don’t like. You would constantly make new enemies and spend your life looking over your shoulder. Like telling a lie, it’s necessary to keep lying to cover up for the one before. Each enemy we destroy creates more enemies. The only way to truly be at peace in the end doing things this way is to kill every single one of them.
You are better off, on both a personal and national scale, reducing the number of enemies you have to deal with in a diplomatic fashion. There will always be evil people bent on destruction... but at the very least having a kind and generous heart towards the rest of the population of the earth would engender a feeling of kindness and goodwill towards the people of the US. In reducing our fear we have been 100% wrong these past few years.
As someone who lived in very close proximity to New York City all his life, with many friends and relatives living there, I can tell you my fear level has increased exponentially since our invasion of Iraq. The soldiers who have constantly been a presence on the streets of New York since then are a constant reminder. People living in non-danger zones have no capacity to truly understand living with this fear of the multitude of new enemies that we have created.
So reading this article saying that the battle to preserve our right to not have our personal correspondence invaded upon is very disheartening. What happened to this great new democratic congress and senate we supposedly elected? Oh, they were all out campaigning so not to be ousted by the next billionaire who wants to run for senate. Oh well.
But yesterday I did go to NYtimes.com and read a few articles. The first letting the American public know that Bush had successfully legalized his warrant-less wiretapping program. Now, all international calls and emails can be listened in on without a warrant. They legitimized it by saying, basically, that they aren’t listening to the American citizen, but the foreign person on the other line. So if you call or email your friend in London, they can listen and intercept and it is 100% legal. It essentially says that an American does not have the right to talk to a non-American (or a friend or relative on vacation!) without possibly being listened to.
I know what the argument against me would be: “I’ve got nothing to hide! Anyone who doesn’t want people listening has something to hide.” It has nothing to do with having something to hide or not. It has to do with basic liberties and the “slippery slope” (G.W.’s favorite term these days) it takes us down. Free and uninhibited speech is an essential part of a free political system. It is the idea behind removing rights that is the issue here. Any invasion of privacy is a removal of an essential American liberty, and any removal of one of these essential liberties puts the state of our Union in danger.
“He who is willing to give up freedom or liberty in the name of safety deserves neither freedom nor liberty.” - Benjamin Franklin
I’ve said it before and I will say it again... there are risks that come with living in a free nation. The safest places to live are places with strong, invasive government systems, where the ruling authority knows what is going on in everyone’s lives and exerts control over its people.
This is a whole other issue to get into, but we all want a sense of safety, and in short, I don’t think that starting needless wars that lead to the deaths of up to 500,000 innocent civilians, and angering the entire world is the way to be at peace with ourselves and the world. Living life that way will give you as much peace as going out an killing all the people you don’t like. You would constantly make new enemies and spend your life looking over your shoulder. Like telling a lie, it’s necessary to keep lying to cover up for the one before. Each enemy we destroy creates more enemies. The only way to truly be at peace in the end doing things this way is to kill every single one of them.
You are better off, on both a personal and national scale, reducing the number of enemies you have to deal with in a diplomatic fashion. There will always be evil people bent on destruction... but at the very least having a kind and generous heart towards the rest of the population of the earth would engender a feeling of kindness and goodwill towards the people of the US. In reducing our fear we have been 100% wrong these past few years.
As someone who lived in very close proximity to New York City all his life, with many friends and relatives living there, I can tell you my fear level has increased exponentially since our invasion of Iraq. The soldiers who have constantly been a presence on the streets of New York since then are a constant reminder. People living in non-danger zones have no capacity to truly understand living with this fear of the multitude of new enemies that we have created.
So reading this article saying that the battle to preserve our right to not have our personal correspondence invaded upon is very disheartening. What happened to this great new democratic congress and senate we supposedly elected? Oh, they were all out campaigning so not to be ousted by the next billionaire who wants to run for senate. Oh well.
posted by adampaul at
10:20 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home