If You Don't Care About The NSA Because You 'Haven't Done Anything Wrong,' You're Wrong
from the you-have-done-many-things-wrong dept
Cardinal Richelieu's famous line is:If you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of men, I will find something in them which will hang him.It's easy to twist almost anything to be used against you if someone cares enough. And with a legal code that means people are committing, on average, three felonies a day (at least according to one estimate), it can be even worse.
That's worth keeping in mind any time someone writes off the NSA as not being an issue for them because they've "done nothing wrong." Driving home that point is an excellent short "Op-Doc" in the NY Times by filmmaker Brian Knappenberger, which has brief interviews with a bunch of great people (many of whom you'll hopefully recognize) explaining in very clear terms why you should absolutely care about the NSA. There are many reasons discussed, but a simple one, highlighted by David Sirota, goes back to that quote above. You can claim that you've done nothing wrong all you want. However, if someone really powerful decides they want to railroad you, you'd be surprised at how much it can be made to look like you've "done wrong." And when the NSA (or the FBI) can readily access all sorts of data about your life, their ability to build such a story increases tremendously.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: brian knappenberger, haven't done anything wrong, nsa, privacy, surveillance
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
My friend always takes the attitude that he has nothing to worry about because he's done nothing wrong and says I shouldn't worry about it either. When I counter with the argument above, he counters that by saying that we're not important enough for anyone to bother spying on or looking into our lives.
He uses the same "I've done nothing wrong" argument every time I tell him about various police abuses of power. He always asks "Are you going to xxxxxxxx?" As if only troublemakers are on the receiving end of police abuse these days.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
If I was a cop, I could go and charge you with reckless endangerment, reckless abandon, attempted homicide, attempted suicide...
Hell, point him to the story earlier today about the police that were arresting the same man 60+ times at the store he worked at.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: possible answer
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ellsberg's comment is insightful
I think it's very naive to imagine you can have separate branches of government, when one branch (the executive) knows the entire private life and private communications, conversations of every member of the other branch.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Huge chunks of law are in this vein of prohibiting things that are varying degrees of dangerous or harmful to people, or society. So when you break one of these laws, you are committing the wrong it prohibits.
Leaving it very easy for people to fall into the mindset of equating breaking any law with doing wrong. That laws themselves can be wrong, or can wrong people is not something that gets considered often.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Bad and Worse
I am more concerned because the same database can and will be used to influence and/or control our elected representatives through blackmail. If it hasn't happened yet, it will - always in the name of patriotism, of course - and I then begin to wonder why there are so few representatives who are up in arms about the deceitfulness of the NSA. I'd think that the reps would be more paranoid, and more worried about what that database might eventually contain on them ... unless they already know, and are keeping quiet as a result.
Before Snowden I'd have dismissed this notion as a laughable conspiracy theory. I'm not laughing anymore.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
For example, how often do we hit a stop sign in a empty intersection every day, and occasionally roll through it at 5 MPH or so? How many of us have gone even a single MPH above the speed limit? How many crossed a not-busy road not at an intersection? How many have poured a bird-bath filled by the recent rainshower out in the yard?
What we want is a law on the book, so that when someone does something REALLY bad, we have something to charge them with. We can point to the big book of laws and say "you can't do that" and get someone that is driving recklessly.
Unfortunately, the NSA and various other "enforcement" agencies have taken it upon themselves to enforce every law blindly and entirely. If we REALLY wanted speed limit laws enforced, why are we complaining about speed traps and not equipping every car with a GPS hooked up to the car computer? If we want a car to NEVER run a red light, why are red light cameras being shouted down in cities across the country?
What we all need to agree on and understand, are that laws are for the benefit of making society work, but aren't ironclad. Unfortunately, I am not able to offer a solution to how we can effectively "selectively enforce" laws to everyone's agreement, but I thought that is what judges were for. Impartial observers that look at the SPIRIT of the law and determine if a persons activity breaks that. Forget the letter of the law.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
for example ???
NSA is not an "enforcement" agency either.
and no enforcement agencies do not enforce laws blindly, they are 'discretion', and often DO NOT CHARGE people for minor crimes.
Even the police, when they pull you over for minor speeding will ask you "do you have any valid reason for exceeding the speed limit" and if you do they may not charge you, or the police may decide to simply give you a warning and send you on your way, happens all the time.
Its a bit sad you don't think that is the case, sad or paranoid..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
You obviously have never encountered policemen. What a fucktard darryl is.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Yeah, I lumped the NSA in with other enforcement agencies, but it was primarily because they have the power to enforce laws they want to (selective assassinations) or pass that information to other agencies. So in my mind, they are just an enforcement agency with the capability to spy on me.
And yes, we DO have what we call "impartial" judges and not machines judging our cases, but all too often to avoid any argument and debate they turn to the letter of the law only for judging a case. How often do you hear of a case getting a bad result, and even the judge them-self upset at it, but feel "restricted" by the law?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
In short - your " black and white justice system" is strawman. It doesn't exists in real life - that's why you appointing judge (and jury in some countries).
Now, NSA doesn't enforce anything. They maybe spying on all you do, but in the end of day - it's police who will arrest you and judge who will convict you.
>> If we REALLY wanted speed limit laws enforced, why are we complaining about speed traps
Because different people ballance convenience and safety differently. Some prefer convenience (speeding) while other safety (speed traps). Whether speeding is actually dangerous or not - is another matter entirely.
>> If we want a car to NEVER run a red light, why are red light cameras being shouted down in cities across the country?
Short explanation - because majority of people are incredibly shortsighted. Actually, you DO want to enforce traffic laws 100% of the time. On some systems (hint: it runs on rails) you have no choice, but enforce it 100% of the time.
In my opinion, all this article is largely bullshit. Yes, it is correct that if some powerful entity wants to harass you - it can. Government spies, police, IRS, even firefighters and local municipality. They all can make your life miserable. It doesn't happen (too often) because of several things: your government (down to local level) is (at some extend) elected and justice system (in average case) is fair. When those condition violated too hard for too long - people will (and had) revolt. No amount of spying will prevent it.
On the other case - if you want to be political activist - prepare to be spied upon. Rulers spied on their rivals (external as well as domestic) from the dawn of time. Kings spied on their siblings as well as on another kings. Oh, you want to protest some stuff - please tell us who you are. Too afraid - I guess your issue is not important enough.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Wisconsin_protests
We will need to get into desperate straits indeed before the vast majority of the people will do anything. Prediction: when they do, the corporate shills currently running the country will sit back laughing as we fight each other over the ideologies they have been feeding us for decades.
So... where is the angry mob you're talking about, Ifroen, and how can you guarantee that they'll be sensible enough to only guillotine the bad guys?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
You should grasp concept of proportions. For angry mob to form, _very_ bad things should happen. Bad in scale of Europe-start-of-20-century, not US-recession-21-century. Usually famine+cruel government+unfair justice system speed things up.
Your example doesn't really count - people still have right for assembly, for speech, for vote etc.
>> how can you guarantee that they'll be sensible enough to only guillotine the bad guys
You can not. And they will not "guillotine only bad guys". Again - look at Europe and beginning of 20's century.
In short - I don't wish you to be there when such stuff happen. It's bloody and ugly.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
False, actually. We don't want the rules enforced in certain edge cases, such as if the light were to malfunction and freeze in a particular state. Another, far more common edge case is when it is not safe for one to stop due to a tailgater that intends to run the light.
A patch of ice could work similarly, where a driver might realize that attempting to stop for a yellow light that will be red when they reach it would cause them to lose control of their vehicle and that there is lower risk in purposefully running the red light.
That is a good argument against the deliberate and conspiratorial implementation of such practices, and we do see that organized coups are somewhat rare. Unfortunately, simpler forms of corruption and idiots abusing their power for some short term fun or profit aren't dissuaded terribly well by the argument that they are driving the populace towards rebellion.
Corruption can and has become systemic in many societies, which have come to demonstrate the norms you suggest cannot happen. Further, a number of eras in US history have seen groups targeted in this manner. Which groups end up demonized is a lottery at this stage.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
But its still my nothing, and i want to decide who gets to see it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
how often does this happen
You honestly think the NSA spying on you is going to make it easier for them to charge you for running a traffic light ?
Geezz that's paranoid !!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: how often does this happen
Also, never gets old, having anonymous commenters talking about how violations of privacy, and therefor anonymity, are good things.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: how often does this happen
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130805/10035024070/dea-not-only-gets-intelligence-data-then-i s-instructed-to-cover-up-where-it-gets-info.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20131031/152348250 94/bruce-schneier-speculates-nsa-double-laundering-information-it-obtains-via-network-infiltration.s html
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
the fact that they DO spy, and they DONT charge thousands a day for anything, means you are simply WRONG !!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Do you still cling to this stupid nonsense you seem to believe that the NSA is charging people when they can't? Or that they would TELL YOU that they are using your information against you?
You're naive and blind.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
You're a moron. Cut your dick on a solar panel.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
You seem unclear on the concept. Actually, lots of concepts.
No one said that they file charges against every felony. Just that if they happen to target /you/ and decide they want to destroy your life, they have the tools to do so.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Of cause they do! They are _SPY_ agency for ***'s sake! Of cause police/NSA/CIA/Mossad/GRU/KGB can make your life very miserable (and short). That's what they do.
The only problem with this ridiculous NSA dragnet is enormous wasting of public's money on stuff that have nothing to do with safety/security of the state.
Spying on Merkel (or other european politicians) ? No problem, probably she/they should fund her own agency better.
Getting caught IS a problem, and this is indicator of incompetency.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Rising up
No, a big uprising today would be put down by the powers that need to keep their power intact.
Now that they're addicted, no way their giving up that power.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Rising up
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
When those who would oppose the oppressor fear to do so, then the oppressor has free reign to do as they wish. When opposition is fierce, those in opposition risk some censure for their actions, but hold the oppressive force in check and can work on removing the oppressor through peaceful means.
~FDR
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
personal cloud solutions
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Speaking of data collection...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Speaking of data collection...
PROTON, CLEARWATER and LEXIS-NEXIS
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Laws and Judges
I've seen more than my share of judges deciding that they not only will go beyond the letter of the law, but exact the maximum sentence on provisions that were never imagined before. The "3 Strikes" law is one prime example of bad law, and what about all those extra tools in the federal level to make sentencing even more problematic?
The law only applies when the prosecutor decides he/she wants to make a statement about the crime and perpetrator.
So if you're convicted of any crime, it's up to the prosecutor and the judge to decide what kind of crime you're convicted of.
The NSA isn't an enforcement agency, of course, but they sure do have alot of friends who are, and believe me, they'll cooperate when the time comes to pay out debts. That's the most dangerous part of this whole debacle-that the NSA can ruin your life due to their ability to link anything to you for criminal purposes.
And that's the danger of thinking "If you've done nothing wrong, you have nothing to fear."
It's all in someone elses' view if you've done something wrong..not yours. You're a criminal when and if you break a law you never knew existed.
Because there's a law against it, somewhere. Just don't piss someone off enough to prosecute you for it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ghostery found 19 trackers www.techdirt.com
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Right != I want everyone to know about it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]