Expectations of Privacy

Donald Kerr is confused. As deputy director of national intelligence, Kerr testified before Congress as it considers the "new and improved" Foreign Intelligence and Surveillance Act that it amended last year so as to allow the government to eavesdrop on communications inside the United States without a court order, as long as one end of the communication is believed to be outside the U.S. Lawsuits have been filed against large telecommunications companies alleging that the government is actually copying every call, e-mail and Internet site access that goes through some telecom centers. Unsurprisingly, the Bush administration, and people like Mr. Kerr, want a bill that gives the telecom companies immunity from such lawsuits, so that the overreaching of this government in its misguided attempts to "protect us" go unscrutinized.

At an October intelligence conference in Texas, Mr. Kerr said he finds it "odd" that people are concerned about government eavesdropping when they are willing to allow "a green-card holder at [an Internet service provider] who may or may not have been an illegal entrant" to handle their data. He also pointed out that millions of people participate in social networking sites such as Myspace and Facebook, and allow information about themselves to be published in those fora.

Leaving aside the irrelevant misdirection regarding immigration status contained in the above quote, it is obvious that Mr. Kerr is in need of some quick lessons in the difference between choosing to release information, and having all one's conversations copied into a central database. Further, he may want to brush up on the difference between private entities and the government.

What Mr. Kerr may have forgotten in the course of his civil service, is that the government wields enormous power over the lives of its citizens, a power even the largest and most well-organized corporations could only dream of having (yet). This particular government, furthermore, has shown it has no qualms at all about utilizing that power against anyone it deems a threat, regardless of Constitutional limits or international law. There is also, again, the issue of choice. In case Kerr is unfamiliar with the process, he should know that neither Myspace, nor Facebook, or any other social networking site requires anyone to publish their information. A choice to do so should not, in any way, lead us to the conclusion that that person, let alone all of society, has completely given up his privacy rights.

What I find odd is that Mr. Kerr seems unaware of these distinctions. The mere fact that a member of the government, a deputy director of intelligence no less, can make such statements with a straight face shows how far we have allowed this administration to go in shaping public discourse and obfuscating the most basic issues of civil liberty. Congress must not cave in to these types of tactics and grant further power to a government that is, and has been for some time, beyond the pale of basic decency in its dealings with those that disagree with it, both abroad and here at home.

The American people would do well to remember the quote usually attributed to Benjamin Franklin: "Those who would give up a little liberty for a little security will lose both and deserve neither."