Cowicide – Just because I have nothing to hide doesn’t negate the fact that I am guaranteed my rights.

Burt, did you somehow hallucinate that I said something that would go against that? I think you udderly misunderstood what I was saying. Re-read. More carefully. Now moove along.

But given the ‘ordered’ nature of governments, I think that most would choose to have access to vast amounts of data as opposed to ignoring it. The difference TODAY is that access to this information is simply too easy to obtain. Privacy is a luxury. Who is going to go back to using paper systems when they have access to paperless ones?

In the 80s, I had my head bashed in during a gang assault on the way home from work and had to have facial reconstructive surgery, so I understand the need for security.

In the 70s, I had the Secret Service come to my house looking for me and had ‘men in black’ chase me down the street, know my name and threaten my life if I didn’t desist my political activities, so I understand the need for privacy.

Between the two options, I’ll take my chances with the gang.

“The government which governs best, governs least.”

BTW, has it not dawned on anyone that all the Bush admin illegal eavesdropping, etc…. just might… oh… “just might” be used to spy on business communications in order to thwart competition?

If you’d put THAT past the people in power; then you are truly a naive idiot.

Article 12.

No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.

EH – Although non specific, the ninth amendment guarantees enumerated rights to the American citizen. These enumerated rights include natural rights, background rights, and fundamental rights. Specifically, what these rights entail is arguable unfortunately.

But on another note and more specifically addressing your response, just to be clear, my argument regarding security v. privacy is not aimed at the corporate sector but more towards the public sector. The liberties of the public which were infringed upon by bills such as the patriot act which was quickly rushed through the senate with little debate before being signed. With regards to your claim “that material privacy is not codified in the Constitution beyond the third and fourth amendments”, this act is in direct violation of the fourth amendment as it bypasses the need for a search warrant with wiretaps. Don’t play the “probable cause” card either because it’s a cop out.

Apashiol – I agree with regarding how the advancement of technology within our media, such as the creation and accessibility of the internet to the average American citizen has opened many doors allowing them immeasurable freedom and influence but like I said before, the internet is not the only means of communication that the government has been unjustifiably sticking its nose into with the use of illegal wiretaps on phones which is in direct violation of the fourth amendment.

I find myself asking how people can have such blind faith and be so accepting of the media, specifically the news? It is indeed like you say, very insidious how the media and government can conspire to create this false sense of fear and use this in order to convince people to give up their rights because the government is looking out for their “best interests”. Although this isn’t so much the case now, can you remember when practically everyday after 9/11 for an extremely long time they were changing the terror threat level?