Slashdot Mirror
Stallman: Thousands Dead, Millions Deprived of Liberties
The worst damage from many nerve injuries is secondary -- it happens in the hours after the initial trauma, as the body's reaction to the damage kills more nerve cells. Researchers are beginning to discover ways to prevent this secondary damage and reduce the eventual harm.
If we are not careful, the deadly attacks on New York and Washington will lead to far worse secondary damage, if the U.S. Congress adopts "preventive measures" that take away the freedom that America stands for.
I'm not talking about searches at airports here. Searches of people or baggage for weapons, as long as they check only for weapons and keep no records about you if you have no weapons, are just an inconvenience; they do not endanger civil liberties. What I am worried about is massive surveillance of all aspects of life: of our phone calls, of our email, and of our physical movements.
These measures are likely to be recommended regardless of whether they would be effective for their stated purpose. An executive of a company developing face recognition software is said to be telling reporters that widespread deployment of face-recognizing computerized cameras would have prevented the attacks. The September 15 New York Times cites a congressman who is advocating this "solution." Given that the human face recognition performed by the check-in agents did not keep the hijackers out, there is no reason to think that computer face recognition would help. But that won't stop the agencies that have always wanted to do more surveillance from pushing this plan now, and many other plans like it. To stop them will require public opposition.
Even more ominously, a proposal to require government back doors in encryption software has already appeared.
Meanwhile, Congress hurried to pass a resolution giving Bush unlimited power to use military force in retaliation for the attacks. Retaliation may be justified, if the perpetrators can be identified and carefully targeted, but Congress has a duty to scrutinize specific measures as they are proposed. Handing the president carte blanche in a moment of anger is exactly the mistake that led the United States into the Vietnam War.
Please let your elected representatives, and your unelected president, know that you don't want your civil liberties to become the terrorists' next victim. Don't wait -- the bills are already being written.
Copyright 2001 Richard StallmanVerbatim copying and distribution of this entire article are permitted in any medium provided the copyright notice and this notice are preserved.
This is what I hear:
piss moan whine Don't take away my freedom
bitch piss moan You better not use this to take advantage of me
gripe bitch whine Oh no, the guy I didn't want for President gets war time powers during war time
What I do not hear:
Members of congress here is a way to realize Civil Liberties AND the protection of world citizens
Mr President I wish to help, here are some possible solutions to the problem
I'm sorry people but if we are only going to bitch about what our government officials do and never give them workable ideas and solutions then shame on us.
And remember as Abraham Lincoln told us, we have a "government OF the people, BY the people FOR the people"
that statement requires your active partitcipation not just you criticisms.
Please be patient, I'm a work in progress! --Alan Jackson
it's all about what you value. as for me, i would gladly trade in being surveiled every moment i am outside my house, having every keystroke logged from both home and work computers, all my phones tapped, all my mail opened and read, for something of value, because those privacies are not things that i personally value. sure, i don't want cameras watching me scratch my ass walking naked from the kitchen back to bed, but i'd even trade that privacy for the right price.
the point is that these kind of laws do not allow the existance of other points of view - namely, the people who value their privacy more than whatever value is being added (if any) by the erosion of their privacy.
we have freedom of religion, freedom of press, etc. and of course the 4th amendment protections against searches, etc. but remember that the 4th amendment says 'unreasonable' and that is one of the adjectives which most sways from person to person. it is like 'immoral', because the things which are unreasonable to me may be perfectly okay with you, and other things which might be immoral to you are my everyday habits. what it comes down to is a group of people are going to decide what 'unreasonable' is - and these people are not elected.
but anyway... like i said. as for me, privacy is not now nor has ever been much of an issue. i don't do anything illegal, and the software i write is open source anyway so people sniffing my wires for my bits doesn't get them anything. i've probably only posted once or twice anonymously. sure, i've said tons of things i'm not proud to have said, but anonymity and privacy are just not very important to me.
not nearly as important as being able to fly home to see the family and not worry about if my plane is going to be crashed into the Sears tower.
blah. i'm just tired of seeing all these 'trade your freedoms for security' posts. sure, i support those people's right to keep their privacy, but if they feel that strongly about it they can stop flying or going to any place which requires surveiled citizens with their brain-implanted ID chip. it's like the mark of the beast, eventually you won't be able to buy bread without joining the majority of people who really just want to be able to walk down the street without being shot at.
-sam
The REAL sam_at_caveman_dot_org is user ID 13833.
The president was elected, dickweed.