Tuesday, February 12, 2008

Eavesdropping And You!

I told you: the NSA really IS watching me! (Or, in this case, listening.)
"After more than a year of heated political wrangling, the Senate handed the White House a major victory Tuesday by voting to broaden the government's spy powers and to give legal protection to phone companies that cooperated in President Bush's warrantless eavesdropping program..."

This isn't good. I know right now we're talking about international calls / groups, but it just gives me a queasy feeling. It just doesn't sit well in my stomach. Today, it's eavesdropping on international calls out of suspicion; what's the excuse tomorrow? I'm uncomfortable knowing that at any time for any reason (since there's no or little accountability here, no one running to get a warrant with evidence in hand) that someone could be listening in on other (likely innocent) people. If this sort of thing is becoming tolerable, are they going to say that eavesdropping on activists is okay because they may all be guilty of trying to start riots?

I have friends overseas, one in India and one in South Africa, specifically. Whenever I write to them, I write as if someone other than my friends are reading. I often discuss politics with them (since whatever happens here will very likely effect them) and I often censor myself. Even in emails I send to friends in the US, I'm careful. It's unfortunate and it makes me worry about what could happen down the road. It makes me worried that there may come a day when activists, writers, artists, thinkers of all kinds may feel pressure to censor themselves because...who really knows who's watching or listening?

During and after the French Revolution, the governments in France and England forced a kind of censorship of writers, mostly poets. There's some really good political poetry from that time, but governments would shut down the publishers that printed such poems. Some writers just gave up; Wordsworth, in a way, is an example. He cooled off and decided it wasn't worth the trouble anymore.

We can't allow ourselves to be silenced in any way. Patriotism isn't, as supporters of legalized eavesdropping claim "in complying with what they believed in good faith was a legally binding order from the president." Patriotism IS defiance. Patriotism IS speech. Today, they claim their actions are against a small group of people in a very specific circumstance. You can choose to believe that, but - given this administration's propensity for lying - you may want to think about it a little bit harder.

In other news, there are more elections going on today. I really wish I could say I had faith in the people of this country, but the last eight years have taught me better. While I will support Obama, I will never say he was my first choice. I just pray he doesn't let me down...I pray he wins in the first place.

It's not, at all, an issue of "lesser evils." I don't see Obama (or Clinton either, really) as being an "evil." I think he has some good ideas, but I'm also cynical and tired of candidates saying anything they think will get them elected. That's one reason I don't like Clinton; she knows words (which is good) and she knows how to manipulate them so as to be as vague as she wants to be, depending on with whom she is speaking. I don't feel Obama is as guilty of that, but I think any major party candidate with a shot at winning does that; it's survival.

It's also unfortunate.

What's refreshing about third party candidates (or...Kucinich, haha) is that they seem more willing to actually say things. Truth in politics sounds like an oxymoron, but that is what I crave. Tell me the truth. Tell me what you'll really do. Broken campaign promises are as cliche (and predictable) as broken hearts.

No comments: