Slashdot Mirror
Rosenzweig Now Chairman of DHS Privacy Board
An anonymous reader writes "Paul Rosenzweig, a conservative lawyer and prominent proponent of the Pentagon's controversial Total Information Awareness project, has been
appointed the first chairman of the Department of Homeland Security's privacy board. This follows the appointment of an executive of Gator to the board. Lee Tien, a lawyer with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, says that, rather than viewing protection of privacy as priority, Rosenzweig 'tends to view privacy as something to be circumvented.' Are the foxes guarding the henhouse when it comes to government and privacy?"
The current administration has no respect for laws and the constitution. They've said as much. They say it's all about stopping terrorists. They are trying to build a 'Fortress America' with the borders completely shut. We are already seeing scientists from other countries shunning the States because it is such a pain getting a visa. We are going to see Americans having as much trouble getting back into the States as foreigners do. (ie. you won't be able to get back in from Canada without a passport.) American trade is going to dry up because nobody will want to do business with us.
Basically, this paranoia and disrespect for the law isn't much different than the death of Roman democracy. Add to that the fact that we are bleeding wealth like crazy and you have a the makings of a disaster.
I wonder how hard it is to emigrate to New Zealand?
It seems to me that privacy only matters if there is a threat of sanction for the private behavior. Hiding stuff tends to add a layer of unhealthy psych because of the continual threats to the integrity of the cloak.
The real need is to roll back the ability of the mob to make your life miserable if you choose to think or do something that is unconventional.
In the long run, which is going to leave us in a better position? Should we be fighting to maintain privacy in the face of increasingly efficient snooping, or fighting for freedom of thought and action?
Not that anyone's really going sacrifice much to achieve either of those goals . . . .
No more cults.
That's why they found enough money to add a $521B boondoggle medicare package that not even AARP supported, but when the time came to fund 10,000 new border patrol agents they said they didn't have the money for more than 210, right?
Click here or a puppy gets stomped!
The problem is that America has now reached the ultimate phase in the ELITE universe and has become the first corporate state
Wouldn't it be nice if schools got all the money they wanted and the army had to hold jumble sales for guns
Lower taxes, state's rights, and free trade have never been considered traditional liberal values, at least not any time in the last 50 years, so it's hardly surprising that you find liberal politicians working against those goals. And since when have liberal politicians made proclamations of personal morality a primary message of their campaigns?
Liberals have their tropes, to be sure, and you can find plenty of politicians abandoning their stated principles on the left. That doesn't mean the right isn't doing it. If anything, conservatives should by the very definition of the word "conservative" be much more concerned with upholding their traditional values. I see those values (a lot of which I agree with) falling by the wayside and it saddens me.
The irony is that this is true exactly to the extent that we believe it to be true, and are willing to act on our beliefs. Cynical helplessness always plays into the hands of established power.
This reminds of when during the election Bush "said" he wanted to reinstate the draft.
I don't remember anyone claiming that Bush said that. As I understood it, people were saying that his actions were going to make it inevitable that a draft would be necessary. Do you have any references which say otherwise? I'm genuinely curious.
-Chris
San Francisco values: compassion, tolerance, respect, intelligence
Politics of the organization's leaders aside, why should the ACLU spend money defending the 2nd amendment when there is already a huge organization which probably spends more money on the 2nd amendment than the ACLU does on everything else?
It seems in the end if you consider everything important you get fucked, the only difference is in what hole you take it.
when he says
I think he's right.A little less privacy at the highest levels of government and in the corporate ranks would do wonders for increasing their dismal reputations for hiding incompetance and fraudulent behavior.
Perhaps this new found penetration of privacy could be applied to the Vice President's meetings with business officials to come up with an energy policy. God knows we're ready for one.
"Provided by the management for your protection."