Trim back 'Big Brother' laws

Posted Wednesday, June 26, 2013, at 8:20 AM

The U.S. is currently dealing with two embarrassing cases where individuals with security clearances released classified documents to the world.

Yet, the Manning WikiLeaks case is fundamentally different from the Snoeden document release. In both cases, the government was embarrassed by some of the gossip-like nature of the revelations, but governments get embarrassed sometimes and just have to live with it. In the Manning case, however, some of the information released may (and we stress may, since the trial is still underway) have directly affected ongoing operations against enemy combatants. The government may have a better case proving that actual, direct harm occurred to American forces as result of those leaks.

Snoeden, on the other hand, has essentially done little more than reveal to the American public (and thus the world) the extent of U.S. intelligence-gathering information. Most of these capabilities have actually been well known for several years. The NSA's snooping capabilities are legendary. Even our enemies are well aware of our capabilities and know that we've been doing to them the very things we accuse (usually correctly) that they are doing to us when it comes to cyberwarfare. Frankly, other than getting a lot of press, there isn't a lot that's actually a surprise about Snoeden's revelations. It simply confirms that our increasing dependence on technology has, inevitably, brought us to the world of Big Brother.

Once again, we are hampered by the failure to establish a clear definition of what constitutes the parameters of a right to privacy.

Snoeden, however, should have the courage of his convictions and return to the U.S. to face acceptance or rejection by the American people of his actions through the legal process of the courts -- as Daniel Ellsberg did after release of the Pentagon Papers.

The press has been criticized by some for giving Snoeden a platform to make his revelations, but back in the days of the Pentagon Papers, a case of uncanny similarities to what Snoeden has done, Justice Black once wrote: "... the responsibilities of a free press is the duty to prevent any part of the government from deceiving the people...." and there is no question we have been deceived by our government.

In a related Pentagon Papers case, Judge Murray Gurfein wrote that: "The security of the Nation is not at the ramparts alone. Security also lies in ...the even greater values of freedom of expression and the right of the people to know." We think the people have a right to know that the government is snooping on them. Like the Pentagon papers, it is possible that what Snoeden did is actually, in the long run, in the national interest.

Granted, much of this snooping is now legal, in part thanks to the Patriot Act, which we continue to believe should have been repealed years ago, not renewed by Congress (who then complains when the administration actually uses the power Congress gave it). And, we concede much of the "snooping" is relatively benign -- for most of us -- for now. But times could change and the government shouldn't have this power in the first place.

The argument that checking everyone's mail is preventing terror attacks may have some small validity. But we can't live in a risk-free society. As long as we continue to restrict the liberties of Americans -- from body searches to interception of our communications, all without probable cause warrants -- the terrorists are winning. We've become so hyper-conscious of "security" that we've begun to forget the basic principles of this land of liberty.

It's time to put aside the fear and stand for freedom. The ever-growing bush of Big Brother needs to be seriously trimmed back.

-- Kelly Everitt

Comments

View 17 comments

Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. Please note that those who post comments on this website may do so using a screen name, which may or may not reflect a website user's actual name. Readers should be careful not to assign comments to real people who may have names similar to screen names. Refrain from obscenity in your comments, and to keep discussions civil, don't say anything in a way your grandmother would be ashamed to read.

Kelly, I'm just curious on why you are calling Snowden, Snoeden?

I personally don't care if the government is checking the phone calls I make. I prefer that some snooping is done to prevent terrorism. I think that checks and balances are needed within the government to make sure that this doesn't get out of hand. It's not feasible to let the average American in on the snooping because then you are also letting the terrorists know the same thing.

I agree that Snowden needs to face the consequences of what he's done. On the other hand, until he does so he is like "the man without a country" which is a just consequence. If Snowden doesn't like the United States's snooping then I don't think he will like Russia's at all, nor the standard of living that he will have.

Moral majority it's interesting that you think that Zimmerman and Snowden wouldn't get fair trials.

I know that you hate Obama in an extreme, irrational manner so that may be why you think Snowden wouldn't get a fair trial. After all, don't you think that everything Obama does is pure evil?

Now it appears that you are siding in the trial with Zimmerman, an adult man, who happens to be white and/or Hispanic who shot an unarmed teenager who happens to be black.

The pattern in your thinking seems to be pretty obvious.

-- Posted by History_Nerd on Sat, Jun 29, 2013, at 1:33 PM
The right to privacy isn't listed in the constitution although some think it's covered by the 9th amendment. Maybe it should be an amendment to give it more definition.

MM did some black guy offend you other than by being elected as your president?

-- Posted by Geordey on Sat, Jun 29, 2013, at 3:51 PM
Here we go again pulling the dirty old race card. Sad that it always boils down to that.

-- Posted by OpinionMissy on Sun, Jun 30, 2013, at 10:15 PM
Maybe it is just the simple fact that Obama is a dirt bag. Does most of his stuff behind closed doors. Promised an open and honest office and proves over and over that it is anything but that. But some are unable to see the truth.

-- Posted by OpinionMissy on Sun, Jun 30, 2013, at 10:17 PM
If most of the stuff gets done behind closed doors, how are you able to see the truth? Can you see and hear through walls when you're off your meds?

-- Posted by Dave Thompson on Mon, Jul 1, 2013, at 1:16 PM
Anyway, the Supreme Court dealt "Big Brother" a good wallop last week when it clobbered DOMA.

-- Posted by Dave Thompson on Mon, Jul 1, 2013, at 1:19 PM
FUNNY THING......MM....ALL WHITE FEMALE JURY....speaking of dirt bags I can think of 21 governors who would fit that bill.....but of course they are GOP GOVENORS and we know how honest they are.Speaking about deaf,blind and dumb.These are people who are circumventing the law at every turn. GEORDEY.....I asked him the same question ...no answer......maybe he will answer you???? SNOWDEN....SHOULD BE CONSIDERED A TERRORIST AT THE LEAST A TRAITOR.HE wants to make a lot of money for his 15 mins of fame,the fact that he put our intellergence both electronic and human at risk means nothing to him.He has helped to make our intell ineffective it is why we cant get human intell .....nobody wants to work for someone who cant keep a secret and cost people there lives and the lives of there family's .......EXAMPLE .......the person who helped us get ben laden is now in a Pakistani jail that is a heck of a reward for helping us, that is the kinda garbage snowden has caused.No the agency's are not going to tell us that in public but we ought to be smart enough to know it.

-- Posted by lamont on Mon, Jul 1, 2013, at 6:55 PM
It looks like the Zimmerman trial is about race and people's perceptions of each other based on that.

I'm not sure why Obama would be considered a dirt bag because there are some secrets in government. We've had the CIA for a really long time so we should be aware of secrets in government from a lot of different presidents unless they were all dirt bags including Ronald Reagan.

I agree with the Supreme Court DOMA decision. Big Brother in the form of the tea party was getting out of hand.

-- Posted by Sam_1776 on Mon, Jul 1, 2013, at 6:59 PM
HI SAM......I would have to agree about the trial,That becomes very obvious if you listen to the testimony, to bad but real.The biggest thing that gets me is the presumption of guilt.......he must be up to something......I have always said that gets people killed for no reason.

THE name calling is common here,and when directed at this president our right wing folks feel justified. Besides that this president has endured more of it than any other president in history, TO BAD THEY DONT LOOK AT THEMSELVES.

-- Posted by lamont on Mon, Jul 1, 2013, at 8:04 PM
I definitely think there is a racial overtone to the disrespect and hatred that I'm seeing towards Obama. Things have improved over the years but in some cases it's still there only more subtle.

It isn't just racial, its prejudice in general. The women have to be kept down. The Mexicans have to be kept down and kept out. The gays have to be looked down upon. In my opinion it is the most insecure either due to lack of education, income or some other factor that makes people need to keep down another group of people because maybe they think that raises them up.

-- Posted by Sam_1776 on Mon, Jul 1, 2013, at 8:17 PM
Moral majority are you saying that you don't hate Obama and really think that as the elected head of this great country he should get some respect?

-- Posted by Sam_1776 on Tue, Jul 2, 2013, at 10:49 AM
MORAL MAJORITY.....I didn't say you did.......so your paronia has got the best of you....I find it funny that the only person you jump at is me .......why is that??? I MAKE A STATMENT about the use of a term by someone else and here you come.....The only thing directed at you MORAL majority was the comment about the all white jury......and it's implications to equal justice,you seem to think MR ZIMMERMAN CANT GET.

FOR THE RECORD......I don't think mr Zimmerman following the martin kid was justified and without that we wouldn't be were we are.But for the presumption of what a black is doing or not doing is what has gotten us in more trouble than it should,and yes I have been subjected to the same crap right here in good old mtn home.MORAL MAJORITY......have you???? I'LL bet you can justify those actions..........based on what????

I have said it before if it's not happening to you, you have no idea........Your etheno self righteousness is a trip........

-- Posted by lamont on Tue, Jul 2, 2013, at 12:31 PM
junkyard dog, the jury isn't allowed to listen to the talking heads or get on the Web. The trial looks fair to me.

-- Posted by Sam_1776 on Tue, Jul 2, 2013, at 1:45 PM
Do teenager's still use the slang word "Homie" when talking about their friends? "Hey Homie hows it goin"

-- Posted by WinterStorm on Tue, Jul 2, 2013, at 4:11 PM
MORAL MAJORITY LETS GET ON THE SAME TRACK .........your comments speak for themselves I don't need to bash you for anything,are you saying that what you say is not you???????You can hate all you want,your list should include indivduals who can only see one way for this country to act,they are as much a detriment to this country as anything.To bad you cant hate the GOP crowd that is changing laws and attempting to subjugate you by taking your vote,As is the Idaho legislature among some others.I dislike the conservative view of what I am all about but I don't hate.And in case you don't know it we have many institutions in this country that could be considered socialist and communist and we have lived with it from our inception.I WOULD SAY FROM YOUR COMMENTS THAT YOU DONT KNOW MUCH ABOUT SOME PEOPLE AND YOUR ASSUMPTIONS ARE SO FAR IN LEFT FIELD THAT THEY ARE OFFENSIVE.The problem is you have not shown you are open to any other thoughts or facts but your own self serving ones.DID you not tell us that all you ever read was something derogatory concerning blacks???? yOU NEVER SAID YOU DID ANYTHING TO SEE WHO THAT APPLIED TO TOO.yOU just lumped us all in the same barrel,you never mentioned anything concerning the fact that there are far more poor whites than there are blacks,there are more on welfare,more on food stamps but you sure pointed fingers the other way........the long and short of it is........the percentage are pretty much the same to bad you didn't take the time to find that out.And that includes those who fit into your self serving list.I don't see my countrymen that way,and how you see them is your business,I don't have cheerleaders and I am sure everyone here can speak for themselves,and they don't always agree with me or anyone else.So if you feel persecuted I suggest you consider what you say,or how you tell us you feel,I only react to what you say.............hows that for the long and short of it?????????

BY the way have bought a jet or and ebony magazine yet/????????????

-- Posted by lamont on Tue, Jul 2, 2013, at 5:36 PM
Moral majority, Jesus said to love your enemies not hate them. Is it moral or immoral to not follow the teachings of your religion?

On the topic of the blog, I don't think there is anything in the Bible about not checking to see who is calling who on their phones however, if Congress could work together, we might be able to have some ground rules on that.

-- Posted by Sam_1776 on Tue, Jul 2, 2013, at 5:37 PM
HEY .....JYD YOU ARE ABSOLUTLY RIGHT........I personally think everyone should have to serve jury duty at some time in there life they might see justice and our courts a little bit different...........you have a great day

-- Posted by lamont on Tue, Jul 2, 2013, at 5:39 PM

Respond to this blog

Posting a comment requires free registration:

If you already have an account, follow this link to login
Otherwise, follow this link to register