![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
There is a concern that the Internet could be used to commit crimes and that advanced encryption could disguise such activity. However, we do not provide the government with phone jacks outside our homes for unlimited wiretaps. Why, then, should we grant government the Orwellian capability to listen at will and in real time to our communications across the Web?
The protections of the Fourth Amendment are clear. The right to protection from unlawful searches is an indivisible American value. Two hundred years of court decisions have stood in defense of this fundamental right. The state's interest in effective crime-fighting should never vitiate the citizens' Bill of Rights.
-- (then-Senator) John Ashcroft, 1997
This just shows the pure power struggle of Democrat vs. Republican. No standards, no ethics, no statesmanship. Just one mantra: If the other party is for it, then I shall be against it.
John Ashcroft protesting the Clinton Administration's interest in Internet monitoring, 1997: Click Me
The protections of the Fourth Amendment are clear. The right to protection from unlawful searches is an indivisible American value. Two hundred years of court decisions have stood in defense of this fundamental right. The state's interest in effective crime-fighting should never vitiate the citizens' Bill of Rights.
-- (then-Senator) John Ashcroft, 1997
This just shows the pure power struggle of Democrat vs. Republican. No standards, no ethics, no statesmanship. Just one mantra: If the other party is for it, then I shall be against it.
John Ashcroft protesting the Clinton Administration's interest in Internet monitoring, 1997: Click Me
