Tom, if you read again what you wrote above, you might notice that you're advancing the position that "if you have nothing to hide, why do you need privacy?". That's profoundly un-American, contrary to the principle of innocent until proven guilty and to the Constitution's protection from unreasonable search and seizure. The burden of proof is not on a citizen to prove innocence, it's on the government to prove guilt.
When you write a letter, do you enclose it an envelope? Why? If your correspondence doesn't contain evidence of a crime, why should you care if the whole world reads it? Do you think that in the interests of national security the Postal Service should ban envelopes and require everyone to use postcards? How could you object if you have nothing to hide?
You're getting close to sounding like a cliche from one of those cheezy WWII propaganda films..."und so, iff you haff nozing to hide, vy von't you answer the qvestion, hmmmmm?" The monocle and riding crop don't really suit you, Tom, and the knee-high boots are just plain silly.
Current Events » in reply to re: Paranoia
re: Paranoia
The whole thread (69 posts)
- The National Security Agency has been secretly collecting the phone call records of tens of millions of Americans
- Here is something interesting - good or bad?
- re: The New York Times article from last December
- HIgh crimes and misdemeanors
- Brace for spin
- Tens of millions of Americans?