All In for 1984
George Orwell must have had a time machine. No, I'm not talking his prediction of the Fox News Memory Hole (tm) where their opinion pieces disappear in case they require a new opinion tomorrow - whatever they like or hate, they've always liked or hated it.
Rather, I'm talking about Britain's head of counter-intelligence, Mark Rowley. In a speech, he said: "Some technology and communication firms are helping militants avoid detection by developing systems that are "friendly to terrorists."
That's "friendly to terrorists" in the sense that some communication is becoming harder for government to spy on. So, preserving your right to private communication is bad. It's like catching someone going through your desk and having them ask you to turn a light on.
Didn't it used to be important to preserve free speech? I can clearly remember reading that somewhere. It's probably gone now - the NSA wouldn't have liked it.
Rowley went on to say: "We all love the benefit of the internet and all the rest of it, but we need their support in making sure that they're doing everything possible to stop their technology being exploited by terrorists. I'm saying that needs to be front and center of their thinking and for some it is and some it isn't."
Yes, technology companies that are making efforts to protect their clients from illegal government data collectors are really helping terrorists. It might help us to believe that if the US or Britain or the Harper stooges in Ottawa could show a single case where their internet interceptors actually stopped a terrorist. I haven't seen one - have you?
These internet spying programs are so transparently not about counter-terrorism that's it funny to even have to mention it. Does anyone believe that they spend billions of our tax dollars on these programs to protect us from something? Anyone?
Clearly the government has moved into our collective electronic houses because they want to keep track of us. They want to read our email and monitor our communication and whereabouts because it gives them power. They know all about me and you. We all live on-line lives now and that life is monitored by our respective governments. And your respective governments. Location is no longer a factor. Signals - internet, telephone - travel in ways that respect no borders, and governments collect those signals.
Just like 1984: The TV in our wall is watching us while we watch it.
And now Rowley - and I'm sure many others in his field - are accusing people of wanting their freedom in order to help terrorists. I am free so therefore terrorists win.
Except that it's the Orwellian opposite. I'm not free when the government tracks me. I'm free when it doesn't.
And the price of that freedom is that I may (or may not) be in greater danger of a terrorist threat. Braver people than I have faced far graver danger as the price of freedom. I can summon up the modicum of courage it takes to live in a marginally less safe world and be free of surveillance.
So, Mr. Rowley, please stop bullshitting us about helping terrorists. It's a lie and an insult. You spy on me and I can't stop you. Only one of us is doing a historic wrong, and it's not the people having their privacy stolen.
Rather, I'm talking about Britain's head of counter-intelligence, Mark Rowley. In a speech, he said: "Some technology and communication firms are helping militants avoid detection by developing systems that are "friendly to terrorists."
That's "friendly to terrorists" in the sense that some communication is becoming harder for government to spy on. So, preserving your right to private communication is bad. It's like catching someone going through your desk and having them ask you to turn a light on.
Didn't it used to be important to preserve free speech? I can clearly remember reading that somewhere. It's probably gone now - the NSA wouldn't have liked it.
Rowley went on to say: "We all love the benefit of the internet and all the rest of it, but we need their support in making sure that they're doing everything possible to stop their technology being exploited by terrorists. I'm saying that needs to be front and center of their thinking and for some it is and some it isn't."
Yes, technology companies that are making efforts to protect their clients from illegal government data collectors are really helping terrorists. It might help us to believe that if the US or Britain or the Harper stooges in Ottawa could show a single case where their internet interceptors actually stopped a terrorist. I haven't seen one - have you?
These internet spying programs are so transparently not about counter-terrorism that's it funny to even have to mention it. Does anyone believe that they spend billions of our tax dollars on these programs to protect us from something? Anyone?
Clearly the government has moved into our collective electronic houses because they want to keep track of us. They want to read our email and monitor our communication and whereabouts because it gives them power. They know all about me and you. We all live on-line lives now and that life is monitored by our respective governments. And your respective governments. Location is no longer a factor. Signals - internet, telephone - travel in ways that respect no borders, and governments collect those signals.
Just like 1984: The TV in our wall is watching us while we watch it.
And now Rowley - and I'm sure many others in his field - are accusing people of wanting their freedom in order to help terrorists. I am free so therefore terrorists win.
Except that it's the Orwellian opposite. I'm not free when the government tracks me. I'm free when it doesn't.
And the price of that freedom is that I may (or may not) be in greater danger of a terrorist threat. Braver people than I have faced far graver danger as the price of freedom. I can summon up the modicum of courage it takes to live in a marginally less safe world and be free of surveillance.
So, Mr. Rowley, please stop bullshitting us about helping terrorists. It's a lie and an insult. You spy on me and I can't stop you. Only one of us is doing a historic wrong, and it's not the people having their privacy stolen.
posted by fiduciary at 11:18 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home