Why is this stuff even debated?
Report: Domestic surveillance program relied on flawed analysis
It used to be that a semi-literate high school kid could tell you certain â€œinalienable rightsâ€ enjoyed by Americans included privacy alongside things like freedom of speech and right to a speedy and fair trial (both also dead). This kid might even know that â€œinalienableâ€ means â€œincapable of being surrendered or transferredâ€ â€“ but at the least heâ€™d know these were things we were promised as a function of our national identity. Why then does CNN report on the destruction of privacy as, â€œThe highly controversial no-warrant surveillance programâ€??? Shouldnâ€™t â€œhighly controversialâ€ be simply stated as illegal? Why the euphemisms? What a sad joke.
Itâ€™s no wonder that a high school kid today would know nothing of his rights as an American.
Jerks. The kid too.
2 responses to “”
The narrow view from here in the states is that “at least it’s better then ‘out there’”. Are civil rights respected any better over in Shanghai?
If that’s the case then shouldn’t Americans be doing more to protect those things that make America “better”? What’s the point in being smug about American superiority while ignoring the death of those things that contribute to it being a better place? Where China has spent the past 50 years progressively moving towards more openness and accountability – the US has spent the last 10 years sliding in the other direction. Maybe they’ll eventually meet in the middle? That middle ground won’t be as bad as current China – nor anywhere as good as the America promised to us by the Founders. Should we not ask for more from our governments?