If You Have Nothing To Hide You Have Nothing To Fear

Senator Lindsey Graham:

“I’m a Verizon customer. I don’t mind Verizon turning over records to the government if the government is going to make sure that they try to match up a known terrorist phone with somebody in the United States. I don’t think you’re talking to the terrorists. I know you’re not. I know I’m not. So we don’t have anything to worry about.”

Shorter Graham: “Let’s be good Germans and obey orders. If you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear.”

The problem is I don’t trust government. Neither did our Founding Fathers. The government already knows where you live and work. They know if you vote and what party you are registered with. Soon they’ll have your medical records if they don’t already. Do we really want them to know where you go and who you talk to?

If you don’t think they would abuse that power I have three words for you: Infernal Revenue Service. Of course they will abuse power. Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Even if Obama was the saintly leader his followers believe him to be, he won’t always be president. Sooner or later (sooner) that power will be abused.

One more thing – I don’t give a fuck if Bush did it too. He’s not president anymore and he was wrong when he did it. Like I used to tell my kids when they were fighting, “I don’t care who started it, I want it to stop!

Here’s another good German:

About Myiq2xu - BA, JD, FJB

I was born and raised in a different country - America. I don't know what this place is.
This entry was posted in Civil Rights, Corruption, Domestic Spying and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

92 Responses to If You Have Nothing To Hide You Have Nothing To Fear

  1. myiq2xu says:

    I don’t mind the cops searching my house if the government is trying to stop drug dealers. I don’t think you’re a drug dealer. I know you’re not. I know I’m not. So we don’t have anything to worry about.”

    • myiq2xu says:

      I don’t mind the government searching my house if the government is trying to stop racism. I don’t think you’re a racist. I know you’re not. I know I’m not. So we don’t have anything to worry about.”

      • myiq2xu says:

        I don’t mind the government searching my house if the government is trying to stop communism. I don’t think you’re a communist. I know you’re not. I know I’m not. So we don’t have anything to worry about.”

        • myiq2xu says:

          I don’t mind the government searching my house if the government is trying to stop the radical Tea Party. I don’t think you’re a Tea Partier. I know you’re not. I know I’m not. So we don’t have anything to worry about.”

        • votermom says:

          I don’t mind the government searching my house if the government is trying to stop Big Gulp drinkers. I don’t think you’re a Big Gulp drinker. I know you’re not. I know I’m not. So we don’t have anything to worry about.”

    • t says:

      The IRS to squelch political opponents. Unlimited access to phone records to find “dirt” on opponents. Both are a Chicago politician’s wet dream. Please, can we never again have a president from Chicago.

  2. Mary says:

    Actually, what Bush did was not the same. The FISA warrants were more specific, per a suspected terrorist on the other end—evidence coming from another source.

    What Obama is doing is a clear sweep of everybody, just in case. Not the same.

    Not that it matters, as you said, but wanted to clarify. Go read Greenwald—it’s quite clear.

  3. votermom says:

  4. myiq2xu says:

    Lest we forget, J. Edgar Hoover compiled files on politicians and other prominent Americans that contained embarrassing information about them. He used that information to blackmail them into doing his bidding.

    Do you want the government to know you had an affair, got herpes or that you are a closeted homosexual?

  5. wmcb says:

  6. votermom says:

    AP just tweeted this
    BREAKING: Russian President Vladimir Putin and wife announce on state TV they are divorcing

    Oh my. I’d hate to be in her shoes.

  7. votermom says:


    The Secret Law Behind NSA’s Verizon Snooping
    By Noah Feldman Jun 6, 2013 11:44 AM ET
    How, exactly, could the government order a Verizon division to provide records of all calls — that’s right, all — to or from the U.S. on an ongoing basis? The answer is secrecy — but not just in the way you think.
    It’s not only that the highly classified request was made to and approved by a highly classified court. But the legal interpretation of the 2001 Patriot Act that the court appears to have used was itself classified. In other words, there was no way for the public to know what the courts believed the law to mean. And that reality runs counter to the most basic principles of democracy and the rule of law.

    read the rest, supports my point that Verizon should have fought this

  8. DeniseVB says:

    Back when the Patriot Act was first passed, the libs were outraged, yet I had nothing to fear so didn’t really understand the anger other than it was Booooosh. Now that Obama’s taken it further, were’s that outrage now?

    This seems worse to me especially after the IRS targeting specific groups, how do we know this isn’t a big scam to politically spy too?

    • Mary says:

      We don’t. And that’s the point, isn’t it?

    • Propertius says:

      I didn’t have anything to fear either, but that doesn’t make it any of the NSA’s f-ing business. I was mad then and I’m mad now – and I knew this would happen the day then-Senator Obama flipped on telecom immunity. I couldn’t believe the Proggies who insisted that vote was part of some 11-dimensional chess move. No, you idiots,he’s voting for it because he thinks he’s going to win and he wants the power to do it himself. Some people are just unimaginably dense.

  9. votermom says:

    I missed this at the IRS hearing. Trey Gowdy tears up at IRS hearing

  10. angienc says:

    Oh both sides are spinning this one hard — the government is just *archiving* the phone records to *preserve* them in case at some future date they have reason to look up who Person A was calling on June 6, 2013. See (the narrative goes) the phone company doesn’t keep all phone records forever — they purge them every so often; so the government *has* to do this so the records aren’t lost.
    What a bunch of horsesht — violate everyones rights today in case you have probable cause to look at Person A’s records in the future? Sorry bub; that’s not how the 4th Amendment is suppossed to work — if phone records are purged because you don’t have probable cause today to access them: TOUGH SHIT!

  11. wmcb says:

  12. votermom says:

    Another day, another perjury

    On March 12, 2013, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper and other intelligence officials testified about current and future threats to the United States. Senator Ron Wyden asked: “Does the NSA collect any kind of data at all on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans? Clapper answered: “No, sir.” Wyden: “It does not?” Clapper: “Not wittingly. There are cases where they could, inadvertently, perhaps…”

    I suppose it depends on what the meaning of wittingly is …

  13. votermom says:

  14. HELENK says:


    the lives of others.

    a old german movie about life in E Germany under the Nazis then the Communists

    it is happening here. we may not want to face it but it is happening

    tsa – irs – doj – nsa

    • HELENK says:

      The Lives of Others
      By Dr. Ileana Johnson Paugh (Bio and Archives) Thursday, June 6, 2013
      Comments | Print friendly | Subscribe | Email Us

      “Das Leben des Anderen” is a 2006 German drama that describes in painful detail what life was like in the communist East Berlin of 1984, almost six years before the fall of the Berlin Wall, how ordinary and not so ordinary citizens were spied upon by their government, using agents of the infamous Stasi, the German Democratic Republic’s secret police.

      The movie is not important because it showed how a famous actress was spied upon, her life, trials, and tribulations and the secondary minions who answered to the Kommunistische Partei (Communist Party). It is important because it shows the drab and meager daily life of fear, uncertainty, and horror that people in general endured under communist regimes.

      Like the actress in the movie, homes were bugged; all telephone conversations were recorded and listened to. All incoming and outgoing mail was opened, read, and copied by small bureaucrats whose job was to report anything out of the ordinary and catalog their daily blogs.

      The secret police did not have sophisticated wireless technology to spy on citizens like we have today. They also did not seek nor need warrants to record everything people did or said in their homes, cars, on the phone, social media sites, or by email. They had the oppressing power of government on their side and technology was not so advanced.

      • Internal Exile says:

        Communism, ironically, may have been the best thing for capitalism. Communism was a quack remedy so bad it made the disease look good.

  15. votermom says:

    • myiq2xu says:

      Obama has a “robust legal regime” for surveillance activities that works “to ensure that they comply with the Constitution,” White House Deputy Press Secretary Josh Earnest said during the press gaggle Thursday.

      “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

      • votermom says:

        Oh he’s got a regime all right.

      • votermom says:

        • SHV says:

          When Bush/Cheney came up with that “Homeland” BS, it made my skin crawl, it was obvious where all of this shit was headed. The “terrists are going to get you” is useful, however, as it distracts people from the failing economy, which is the existential threat to this country.

          • myiq2xu says:

            When Bush/Cheney came up with that “Homeland” BS, it made my skin crawl

            That was the first time in my life I that began to fear my own government.

        • Propertius says:

          Me, too – it had (and still has) a Triumph of the Will odor about it.

        • DandyTiger says:

          Actually it was the Dems that pushed for DHS. Repubs initially rejected the idea and pushed back. Dems won out with lots of public pressure. Repubs made the best of it of course.

        • Propertius says:


          The bill was introduced by Dick Armey, who also co-authored the original Contract on, excuse me, with America. He was House Majority Leader (Republican) at the time, although the bill had 118 cosponsors from both parties. It passed the House on a roll call vote of 295 – 132 on 7/26/2002. Republicans overwhelmingly approved the bill (207-10), Democrats voted against 120-88. 2 independents (Sanders and Goode) voted against, as well. 4 Republicans and 2 Democrats did not vote.

          It passed the Senate 90-9. 8 of the NAYs were Democrats, 1 was an Independent (Jeffords). Republican support of the bill was unanimous (except for Murkowski, who did not vote).

          See: http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=107&session=2&vote=00249#top



          for the history of the bill in both houses. Don’t forget to thank the unlikely combination of Al Gore and Newt Gingrich for putting this stuff online.

          • myiq2xu says:

            I remember that the FISA revision with retroactive immunity for the telecoms was jammed through a Democrat-controlled Senate with the help of Barack Obama.

        • Propertius says:

          with the help of Barack Obama.

          Who had vowed to filibuster against it. You forgot that part. I’m just amazed that anyone would have voted for him after that stunt.

          FWIW: Hillary, Biden, and Dodd all voted against telecom immunity.

  16. myiq2xu says:
  17. myiq2xu says:
  18. HELENK says:


    interesting face. June 6 1949 George Orwells 1984 was published

  19. SHV says:

    ” “Let’s be good Germans and obey orders. If you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear.”
    Hopefully this is just a small fraction of the abuse that is going to get exposed over the next few years, then maybe there will be a major change of course away from the Police State. It is interesting that people who called those of us who opposed the Patriot Act, FISA, etc., terrorist enablers, un-American, traitors, etc., are the the people who are most affected; a good lesson in a concept that the writers of the Constitution understood; “what goes around…etc.”

  20. myiq2xu says:
  21. Blessyourheart says:

    Obama is Hitler? Well THAT’S original. And ironic coming from a bunch of supporters of people like Michele Bachman and John Eastman who would happily torture and kill gay people if ever given the reigns of power. Talk about vile, take a look in the mirror douchebag.

    • myiq2xu says:

      I don’t want ANYBODY to have that kind of power. As far as “Obama is Hitler”, I never said that, but if the shoe fits . . .

      I was comparing the defenders of NSA domestic spying to the Germans who went along with the Nazi regime. Don’t forget, Hitler was an inspiring speaker who was democratically elected. It took him years to fully implement an authoritarian state. He would never have gotten that far if more people stood up to him early on.

      If we give Obama that kind of power whoever follows him will have it too.

    • wmcb says:

      Your president is being revealed as corrupt, power-mongering, a lying fake, and a failure, who is expanding and exceeding even Bush’s abuses of civil liberties.

      I can totes understand why that’s making you cranky. Need a hug, cupcake?

    • “Michele Bachman and John Eastman who would happily torture and kill gay people if ever given the reigns of power.”

      this is crap bullshit. I am a gay woman and I have NEVER felt that Michelle Bachman wanted to torture and kill me – happily or otherwise – if they had the reigns of power. I am also a Democrat (on paper still) and I DO get that feeling from those who hold the current reigns when I speak out against them.

      Get a grip.

    • HELENK says:

      question for you. what do you plan to replace your freedom with? you seem so willing to give it up.

    • lyn says:

      Obama is a tyrant unto himself.

      “Nothing does more harm to the state than a tyrant; when he rules, equal application of law comes to an end, the one man is tyrant, and he keeps unto himself and in secrecy the law, and so perishes justice. But when the laws are written down, rich and poor alike have equal justice, and it is open to the weaker to use the same language to the prosperous when he is reviled by him, and the weaker prevails over the stronger if he have justice on his side. Freedom’s mark is also seen in this: ‘Let any man possessed of wisdom give counsel to the state.’ And he who comes forward and counsels well, gains renown, while he, who has no wish, holds his silence. What greater equality can there be in a state? Again, where the people are absolute rulers of the land, they rejoice in having the openness and exuberance of youth, while a tyrant counts this a danger, and seeks to slay or silence those possessed of spirit, while the discreet fear his power and violence.”

      –Euripides, The Suppliants, lines 429-40 (423 BCE)(S.H. transl.)

      • foxyladi14 says:

        There’s good reason why Obama usually misses the Daily Briefing. It gives him “plausible deniability”. He can say he “knows nothing” about everything. 🙂

    • Propertius says:

      people like Michele Bachman and John Eastman who would happily torture and kill gay people if ever given the reigns of power

      Isn’t that yet another reason to oppose this sort of infringement? Even if you believe, deep in your heart of hearts, that Obama is on the side of the angels you can’t guarantee that all of his successors will be.

  22. fif says:

    The document shows for the first time that under the Obama administration the communication records of millions of US citizens are being collected indiscriminately and in bulk – regardless of whether they are suspected of any wrongdoing.


    If it looks like fascism and smells like fascism…bulk? Really? They can’t target likely suspects? Not only that, there is a clear pattern of arrogance and overreach in every one of these scandals.

  23. wmcb says:

    BTW, did I miss it? Has Obama said anything about D Day, or is he ignoring it in pique?

    • DeniseVB says:

      He gave a speech at a N.C. middle school today. Not sure why he didn’t want to mosey down to the WW2 memorial and say something nice or greet an Honor Flight or something? He’s off to Cali for fundraisers later.

    • SHV says:

      Seems like he might have some interest, didn’t he have an uncle in the Russian Army who helped liberate Auschwitz? (Obama, dumb as a box of rocks)

  24. DeniseVB says:

    Throwback Thursday, Obama could have let the Patriot Act expire, wasn’t that one of his campaign promises in 2008 ?

  25. Propertius says:

    You know, when I first skimmed the caption on the embedded video of Sen. Norma Desmond, I thought she said “Verizon Court order is awful”.

    I was proud of her for 1/2 second or so until I realized I’d misread it.

  26. HELENK says:

    you have to hear Mark Levin on Neil Cavato. awesome rant. when the video come up it is a must see

  27. votermom says:

    So after I tweeted this

    Tapper starts this


  28. wmcb says:

    Aaaaand the fucking neocons chime in with their own idiocy:

  29. wmcb says:

    • Mary says:

      Wow–that’s a helluva editorial.

      I didn’t think the NYTimes had it in them, anymore.

  30. yttik says:

    I don’t have anything to hide, but I do have that old fashioned American principle that demands I get to keep some privacy and some dignity! Sheesh, I feel violated everytime somebody searches my bags or makes me go through a pat down. So much for the 4th amendment.

    Another problem with the idea that “it’s okay because I have nothing to hide,” is that you don’t know what the “crime” is. You don’t know what they’re looking for and you don’t know how much integrity the people in charge have. You learn that living in a small town. You wouldn’t believe half the crap I’m alleged to have done. I don’t really have anything to hide, but some of the rumor, speculation, and innuendo, is downright embarrassing. You get enoguh tongues wagging and it’s like, oh hell yeah I have something to hide!

  31. 1539days says:

    Barack Obama referred to the Constitution as a document of negative liberties. What he meant was that the Constitution was bad because it reserved powers to the states and the people in the Bill of Rights to keep the federal government from dictating all activities.

    His belief is that positive liberties trump negative ones. He believes in a federal blueprint where citizens have the “right” to an assigned job, an assigned house and centralized medicine. Those negative liberties are the liberties that limit the power of the state to interfere in people’s lives.

    It’s always very subjective to argue whether government observation injures you or the true cost of regulating behavior by economic restrictions. Thanks to this administration, we don’t even have to go that far.

    We know that telecom companies are trying to sell off their wired landlines and they need government approval to do so. We know that Kathleen Sebelius has already put Obamacare mandates ahead of religious freedom. We know that drones are being used to kill Americans without even so much as an indictment. We know that the government wants to weaken the Second Amendment with no evidence that such restrictions have a positive effect. We know that the Department of Justice has committed perjury, prosecutorial misconduct and venue shopping with trumped up charges. We know they have thwarted oversight. We know that the agency with the most police power that does not abide by due process or the presumption of innocence has targeted individual for their political speech.

    This is not theory. This is happening. Mitt Romney was right about the 47%, because if they don’t get it by now, they won’t get it until the doors on the train close.

Comments are closed.