Hmmmmmmmm….

“I doubt that it will be possible to obtain the intelligence capability this country and its citizens deserve without a dramatic realignment that creates an executive authority that places national security first.” — Deutch
Panel Eyes Homeland Spy Service

Don’t think I agree with this. The age old argument is “if you have nothing to hide, then you have nothing to fear.” Uh, wrong! What I fear is abuse of the systems. The reason for checks is not to let criminals go free or give terrorists free reign. Checks exist to protect the innocent from overzealousness in the government.

Most people would probably not abuse the powers necessary to  “place national security first”. However, I guess I have some mistrust and expect there to be people like the rumors (can’t really tell what is truly factual and what is opinion) of J. Edgar Hoover. Note, the prevention of the CIA from spying on U.S. Citizens is a reaction to those rumors.

Let us say we can trust Tenet, Ashcroft, and Bush. Could we trust the next set of officals?

Not so sure most Americans really trust any officials to avoid all potential abuses of the powers currently entrusted to them. Some Americans of course do completely trust government officials. Some Americans are willing to accept some abuses to reach the goal of being protected. Others are scared of the potential for abuse.

Preserved comments:

• 10/21/2003 5:09 PM by anonymous: I hate that old adage as much as you.  No one understands that I feel the government shouldn’t care if I read The Communist Manifesto or endless piles of Romance Novels.  It’s no one’s business.  If they know every movie I’ve rented, that’s wrong.  If I travel more than other people, they shouldn’t necessarily have me on “the list.”  Privacy is a very important right, and it’s increasingly nonexistent, unfortunately.