A few disparate items today in the absence of major news.
On Wednesday, I wrote about a New York Times article detailing problems with Bill Clinton’s organization’s finances and management.
Today, Clinton posted a lengthy open letter on the Clinton Foundation’s website, defending the foundation itself, detailing problems with the organization’s finances and management and stating: “I am immensely proud of what we've accomplished in the last 12 years.”
I mention this because I not only don’t know what else anyone would expect him to write, I’m quite sure most folks would go into some kind of paralytic shock if he admitted guilt and said something like, ‘Yeah it’s all true. You caught me.”
On another subject, in Peggy Noonan’s column in the Wall Street Journal she asks: “What is privacy? Why should we want to hold onto it? Why is it important, necessary, precious? Is it just some prissy relic of the pretechnological past?”
Her main concerns were Edward Snowden, the National Security Agency revelations, and what she refers to as “new fears that we are operating, all of us, within what has become or is becoming a massive surveillance state.”
She goes on to report that “They log your calls here, they can listen in, they can read your emails. They keep the data in mammoth machines that contain a huge collection of information about you and yours. This of course is in pursuit of a laudable goal, security in the age of terror.”
Asking, “Is it excessive?” Ms. Noonan opines that “ It certainly appears to be. Does that matter? Yes. Among other reasons: The end of the expectation that citizens' communications are and will remain private will probably change us as a people, and a country.”
I mention this because I have a very high regard for Ms. Noonan who writes brilliantly, most often agreeing with her completely. But in this case, I think she’s going somewhat overboard.
In fact, she herself encapsulated the issue perfectly when noting that the expectation of privacy in communication is probably changing. Because not only has our nation’s technological capability advanced to where electronic eavesdropping is easily employed, it’s certain that others, such as our enemy's, are developing or already using the same techniques.
Furthermore, I’d assume that what’s being found out now about governmental intrusion, is likely only the tip of the iceberg. Therefore, there are probably things being done that would be far more upsetting and distrustful regarding personal privacy if they were to be disclosed.
So, my advice to Ms. Noonan is to accept the fact that the world has changed technologically indeed and will continue to advance. Therefore, to be safe when communicating electronically at all, simply be sure to keep plans for anarchy, rebellion, government overthrow, subversion or any other kind of illegalities out of the text. Which will make her arrest or internment highly unlikely.
And finally, an item I completely agree with.
According to the thehill.com/blogs via Drudge, “The Republican National Committee voted unanimously Friday to pull the group’s partnership with NBC and CNN for the 2016 GOP presidential primary debates unless the networks kill their planned films on Hillary Clinton.”
In this case, though, I think this is only one issue among countless others. Because it’s certainly no secret that the "mainstream” media's been a staunch supporter of the left for many years, using its forum to promote and defend liberal and socialist causes, while defiling and degrading Republicans, particularly the Conservative wing, in any way they can.
So, while this is a step in the “right” direction, the RNC should take a firmer stance versus all those so-called unbiased reporting outlets. And this would be a good time to do that because they’re currently all losing readership in droves.
That’s it for today folks.
Adios
No comments:
Post a Comment