According to the Economist, your chances of dying as a result of “assault by firearm” is about 1 in 25,000. Americans also have a 1 in 514,147 chance of being killed by “firearms discharge. Keep these statistics in mind as the proponents of spying and taking our privacy away use “OUR” safety and security as their argument. Because the odds of dying of a terrorist attack on US soil are 20,000,000 to 1, that is 20 million to one! 2,966 victims [2,998 as of Spring 2009] died on the attacks of 911 compared with 88,000 Americans killed by gun violence from 2003 and 2010, according to the U.N. study.
So when the Democrats and Republicans who are hell bent on spying on us tell you that it is to keep you safe, pull these statistics out and ask them, “If you are trying to keep us safe why don’t we have gun safety regulations and background checks?”
An American Citizen residing in the United States was around 5,000 times more likely to be killed by a fellow Citizen armed with a gun than by a terrorist inspired by Osama bin Laden. So why is it that a progressive Media Network would be so invested in the United States ability to spy on its Citizens? It is just plain “GARBAGE” that it is about security. Americans are falling like flies due to gun violence and Congress could give a shit. Some of the same politicians that are against “ANY” regulations on guns and gun owners to save lives, are the same politicians that are trying to talk us into giving up our privacy to the NSA to save lives. What do you want to bet it is about MONEY?
In the age of surveillance and secret court orders, a shadowy multimillion-dollar market has developed. Paid for by U.S. tax dollars, but with little public scrutiny, lucrative surveillance fees charged in secret by technology and phone companies are now revenue streams that must be protected at the expense of American privacy.
According to Masslive.com, AT&T imposes a $325 “activation fee” for each wiretap and $10 a day to maintain it. Smaller carriers Cricket and U.S. Cellular charge about $250 per wiretap. But snoop on a Verizon customer? That costs the government $775 for the first month and $500 each month after that, according to industry disclosures made last year to Rep. Edward Markey, D-Mass. In its letter to Markey, AT&T estimated that it collected $24 million in government reimbursements between 2007 and 2011. Verizon, which had the highest fees but says it doesn’t charge in every case, reported a similar amount, collecting between $3 million and $5 million a year during the same period.
The mass surveillance industry is now worth $5 billion a year and growing, with technologies capable of spying on every telephone and Internet network on a national scale. The flagships of this market are called Nokia-Siemens, Qosmos, Nice, Verint, Hacking Team, Bluecoat and Amesys. Asked by the WSJ, Jerry Lucas, the organizer of Intelligence Support Systems (ISS), the international expo that every two or three months brings together communications interception professionals, explained that, from virtually zero in 2001, today that market is worth close to $5 billion in sales per year.
So when you hear that this is about the security of “We the People” it isn’t. It is about “We the Capitalist” and a $5 billion dollar emerging industry that wants to spy with abandon, it is good for business.
Last year the White House released its Privacy Bill of Rights. In the preamble President Barack Obama made this argument in favor of American privacy:
February 23, 2012
“Americans have always cherished our privacy. From the birth of our republic, we assured ourselves protection against unlawful intrusion into our homes and our personal papers. At the same time, we set up a postal system to enable citizens all over the new nation to engage in commerce and political discourse. Soon after, Congress made it a crime to invade the privacy of the mails. And later we extended privacy protections to new modes of communications such as the telephone, the computer, and eventually email. Justice Brandeis taught us that privacy is the “right to be let alone,” but we also know that privacy is about much more than just solitude or secrecy. Citizens who feel protected from misuse of their personal information feel free to engage in commerce, to participate in the political process, or to seek needed health care. This is why we have laws that protect financial privacy and health privacy, and that protect consumers against unfair and deceptive uses of their information. This is why the Supreme Court has protected anonymous political speech, the same right exercised by the pamphleteers of the early Republic and today’s bloggers. Never has privacy been more important than today, in the age of the Internet, the World Wide Web and smart phones. In just the last decade, the Internet has enabled a renewal of direct political engagement by citizens around the globe and an explosion of commerce and innovation creating jobs of the future. Much of this innovation is enabled by novel uses of personal information. So, it is incumbent on us to do what we have done throughout history: apply our timeless privacy values to the new technologies and circumstances of our times. I am pleased to present this new Consumer Privacy Bill of Rights as a blueprint for privacy in the information age. These rights give consumers clear guidance on what they should expect from those who handle their personal information, and set expectations for companies that use personal data. I call on these companies to begin immediately working with privacy advocates, consumer protection enforcement agencies, and others to implement these principles in enforceable codes of conduct. My Administration will work to advance these principles and work with Congress to put them into law. With this Consumer Privacy Bill of Rights, we offer to the world a dynamic model of how to offer strong privacy protection and enable ongoing innovation in new information technologies. One thing should be clear, even though we live in a world in which we share personal information more freely than in the past, we must reject the conclusion that privacy is an outmoded value. It has been at the heart of our democracy from its inception, and we need it now more than ever.”
—President Barack Obama
I was going to write about the injustice of calling “Snowden” a traitor instead of a “Whistleblower” but that would have played right into the distractions and faux hysteria being used by some in the media to take the side of the NSA and silence a conversation on “WHY” Americans should protect their privacy. It is about the money and business….surely if the odds are 20 million to one, it is not about our security…just remember the odds of being killed by a gun are One in 25,000 and Congress has not lifted a finger to keep us “SAFE”! It is about the NRA profits vs. the NSA emerging market! Snowden is a straw man!