http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,11069-2000551,00.html
On virtually every political issue, my repsonse have one underlying theme: less government authority and action is better government action and authority. And here is another case. Frankly, it is NONE of the governments businss what I research on the internet. Cold hard data tells you nothing.
For instance, if you look at my Google search history you will find numerous ku klux klan sites. It would be easy to assume then I in some way, shape or form supported them and I could then become a person of interest in hate crime investigations. This, quite frankly, is ridiculous. Anyone who knows me will assure you I am no racist and, in fact, actively fight it in many forms, not just the blatant racism but more subtle, assumed racism.
No, the reason I searched for those had everything to do with a class. A movie class, of all things. I was studying D.W. Griffith whose movie "Birth of a Nation" is credited with being the first feature film...and also with motivating the resurrection of the kkk. Rumor had it that movie was still credited on kkk sites (it often is). I researched that.
Frankly, if someone saw I had been to several white supremacy sites I would be embarrassed. That is not the kind of behavior I condone and my looking at them could easily be misrepresented and misconstrued. This is just one example of the misuse that can easily be made of internet searches. And with the track record the U.S. government has had since the very beginning of misusing information...and it does not matter if the President was Whig, Democrat, Republican, independant...that misuse occurred...I don't want them having any more info than necessary.
4 years ago
2 comments:
My major issue with this would be the relevance. You can't prove who was using a computer when a search was made, even in cases where you can track it down to the specific computer. Which since the user cannot actually be determined, it seems like this would be overstepping the bounds of their authority as the data would be irrelevant to the case.
On another matter, how do these morons get away with claiming that pornography falls under the realm of "free speach?" People were arrested and/or fined for being foul-mouthed in public during the early years of this country. Free speach does not mean freedom of expression. It means you are free to disagree with government without fear of being arrested because you said it in public.
Hey...John Ashcroft is watching ;)Well, he would be if he could be!
Post a Comment