It is this variants of this line: "If you've done nothing wrong, you have nothing to fear."
Every time the cops trot out that line, you can figure they're creeping closer and closer to a 1984-level security state.
(Some earlier posts on this topic.)
A blog by a "sucker" and a "loser" who served her country in the Navy.
If you're one of the Covidiots who believe that COVID-19 is "just the flu",
that the 2020 election was stolen, or
especially if you supported the 1/6/21 insurrection,
leave now.
Slava Ukraini!
Sunday, November 20, 2011
5 comments:
House Rules #1, #2 and #6 apply to all comments. Rule #3 also applies to political comments.
In short, don't be a jackass. THIS MEANS YOU!
If you never see your comments posted, see Rule #7.
All comments must be on point and address either the points raised in the blog post or points raised by commenters in response.
Any comments that drift off onto other topics are subject to deletion.
(Please don't feed the trolls.)
中國詞不評論，冒抹除的風險。僅英語。
COMMENT MODERATION IS IN EFFECT UFN. This means that if you are an insulting dick, nobody will ever see it.
Don't you find it disconcerting that there seem to be a lot of very logical, sensible arguments for the erosion of your rights?
ReplyDeleteThat line is very soothing to the masses. It keeps the pigeons feeding while the hawk swoops in for the kill.
ReplyDeleteplate readers, I recall reading about them in a manuscript. Seems they are real. Damn, big brother _is_ watching me!
ReplyDeleteNo reason to feel paranoid, you are being watched.
Eck!
So this explains why the cops are putting black tape over their badge numbers -- because they *have* done something wrong, and thus *do* have something to fear. Alrighty, then!
ReplyDelete- Badtux the Observant Penguin
Whenever someone says some version of "If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear," they are talking about fascism.
ReplyDeleteAnyone who knows me knows I never use words lightly and I do not do so here. Because once you accept the logic of the quote, where is the limit? What invasion of privacy, what measure of government surveillance of our every move, of our mail, our phone calls, our bank accounts, our health records, can't be justified on those grounds?
Indeed, you mentioned 1984. By that logic (note I'm not talking the Constitution here, I'm talking the logic), what could be the objection to the cameras inside your house that were part of that story?
Thanks for the link. The casual attitude of the police toward the privacy of the rest of us, the casual embrace of the notion that the limitations on what they can know about us and our movements are only those of the available technology, are truly chilling.