Enter your email address to subscribe to Irregular Times and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 225 other subscribers

Irregular Times Newsletters

Click here to subscribe to any or all of our six topical e-mail newsletters:
  1. Social Movement Actions,
  2. Credulity and Faith,
  3. Election News,
  4. This Week in Congress,
  5. Tech Dispatch and
  6. our latest Political Stickers and Such

Contact Us

We can be contacted via retorts@irregulartimes.com

Violations of e-mail privacy, small and large

While John McCain’s campaign manager huffs and puffs over the fact that someone out there figured out Sarah Palin’s Yahoo password and read her e-mails, calling the affair a “shocking violation of the Governor’s privacy,” he remains mum on the new powers granted the Bush administration to break into the private correspondence of millions of Americans.

The hackers didn’t ask permission to read Palin’s e-mails; the Bush administration doesn’t ask permission to read your e-mails (or read your letters, or listen in on your phone calls, or rummage through your apartment, or seize your veterinary records). The hackers haven’t supplied a full reason for their actions; the Bush administration doesn’t have to give a reason either, or even obtain a warrant. The hackers may have kept Palin’s private and official communications for themselves; the Bush administration can keep whatever information it finds, even if some judge catches up after the legally-stipulated 67 day period of unaccountability and complains that civil liberties have been violated.

Why is everyone getting in a tizzy about one small case of a privacy violation while they seem so astonishingly unconcerned with the violation of privacy of untold millions?

5 comments to Violations of e-mail privacy, small and large

  • Sam

    Not even the same…regardless of what you may believe…it is NOT the same and the law stipulates that. To equate the two is ignrance of the highest order and proves further that you all simply do NOT have the America’s security at heart.

  • Jim

    You’re right. It is NOT the same. Thanks for pointing that out.

    Under the framework of the Constitution, which is after all the Supreme Law of the Land, the massive unwarranted surveillance, search and seizure program underway is MUCH more serious.

    I appreciate your feedback.

  • Sam

    Perhaps you didn’t get the point that the Supreme Court interpts the law and they WILL have the finial say…and you WILL be disappointed….

  • Jim

    Only if YOU and YOUR anti-constitutional allies succeed in stacking the court. And yes, if that happens I will be very disappointed, because that will be the point at which the American experiment of liberty has been brought to a close.

  • Sam

    So says you Jim, so says you…

Leave a Reply

  

  

  

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>