Every free society is challenged by the fear that  freedom can result in devastating consequences for them personally as well as their friends, family and associates. When fear is maximized freedoms are more restricted.  Our own neighbor might be a terrorist so we must listen to everyone’s conversation.  We fear the parents of today can’t properly raise their children so we must restrict how these parents can raise their children (64 oz sodas,  birth control at public schools etc)

How do we balance the challenge of having a free society and a safe society? How do we protect society from those individuals who take “unnecessary risks” that in the end costs us all? How do we insure that our citizens freedoms are protected against fear?  Below are a few ways we can accomplish these missions.

(1) We should profile people not just on their background but also their behavior. Those that fit this criteria will be investigated as well as their contacts.  Their must be a clear timeline set for the closer scrutiny sanctioned by the judicial branch. If no evidence of wrong doing is shown by a certain period of time the surveillance of this individual must be stopped.

(2) Citizens should not be forced by the government to buy a product for themselves or their families if they deem that product not necessary. These individuals must be educated concerning the benefits of such a product and the consequences of not purchasing this product.  Yet  their must be a cost to the individual if their refusal to purchase such a product (ex health insurance) results in a cost for society as a whole.

(3) The government must not prohibit an individual from a buying a product that they desire unless that product causes immediate harm to the individuals and/or those near the individual. Governments job is to educate the individuals about the possible ramifications of their decisions not dictate to them. Government should have the right to put a sin tax on items that have been clearly identified to cause long term harm to said individual and therefore bear a burden to society.

We need to have a place where individuals like Edwin Snowden and other whistleblowers can go without repercussions, when they feel that the government is committing actions that are  unjust. People who work for the government are most likely to see abuses that need to be corrected, yet they fear if they speak out they could lose their job or face even more serious ramifications. We the citizen lose when whistleblowers don’t have an avenue to voice their concerns. Here is how we solve this problem (below) .

1) An independent judicial board selected by Republicans and Democrats is set up.

2) Government officials can send their complaints to this board anonymously and will be guaranteed to receive a response within 30 days.

3) The independent judicial board must confidentially review the complaint and make a recommendation within that 30 days period.

4) If the government employee feels that they have not received an adequate response within 30 days they have the right to have the board send an anonymous general letter of their complaint to the press  and government officials for their review. The government employee will have to approve the letter before it is sent out.

The NSC has declared that their program of seizing records on all it’s employees (the American people) through taking Verizon records, Facebook records etc is an act of national security I call it an act of stupidity. If they are truly to find “possible terrorist and their cells” shouldn’t they keep the scope limited? How does it help looking at Joe Smith’s phone records when they can’t even keep track of Dzokhar Tsarnaev (Boston Massacre’s bomber) post to Facebook? The intelligence community should focus on following the activities of those individuals who have a propensity to acts of violence and their associates and leave the rest of us alone. The constitution under the 4th amendment guarantees the rights of the citizen to unreasonable searches and seizures. I believe the NSC has violated our constitutional rights.

Before we decide if Edward Snowden is a hero or villain I believe you should consider the following questions …. I WOULD LOVE YOUR COMMENTS.

1) Could Mr. Snowden tell his superior officers that he felt that they were violating American’s constitutional rights and get a true hearing on these facts?

2) Is Mr. Snowden act of going public an act which could put other actions of national security at risk?

3) What would you do in such a situation?

4) Does the act of Mr. Snowden encourage others in National Security to leak additional information to the media?

Documents: U.S. intelligence mining data from nine U.S. Internet companies in broad secret program

By  Barton Gellman and Laura Poitras, Thursday, June 6, 2:43 PM

The National Security Agency and the FBI are tapping directly into the central servers of nine leading U.S. Internet companies, extracting audio, video, photographs, e-mails, documents and connection logs that enable analysts to track a person’s movements and contacts over time.

The highly classified program, code-named PRISM, has not been disclosed publicly before. Its establishment in 2007 and six years of exponential growth took place beneath the surface of a roiling debate over the boundaries of surveillance and privacy. Even late last year, when critics of the foreign intelligence statute argued for changes, the only members of Congress who knew about PRISM were bound by oaths of office to hold their tongues.

An internal presentation on the Silicon Valley operation, intended for senior analysts in the NSA’s Signals Intelligence Directorate, described the new tool as the most prolific contributor to the President’s Daily Brief, which cited PRISM data in 1,477 articles last year. According to the briefing slides, obtained by The Washington Post, “NSA reporting increasingly relies on PRISM” as its leading source of raw material, accounting for nearly 1 in 7 intelligence reports.

That is a remarkable figure in an agency that measures annual intake in the trillions of communications. It is all the more striking because the NSA, whose lawful mission is foreign intelligence, is reaching deep inside the machinery of American companies that host hundreds of millions of American-held accounts on American soil.

The technology companies, which participate knowingly in PRISM operations, include most of the dominant global players of Silicon Valley. They are listed on a roster that bears their logos in order of entry into the program: “Microsoft, Yahoo, Google, Facebook, PalTalk, AOL, Skype, YouTube, Apple.” PalTalk, although much smaller, has hosted significant traffic during the Arab Spring and in the ongoing Syrian civil war.

Dropbox , the cloud storage and synchronization service, is described as “coming soon.”

Government officials declined to comment for this article.

Public officials should realize they are serving the entire public not just those that support them. This doesn’t mean that these individuals must change or modify their principals in their position but it does mean they must actively listen to all their constituents. When a public officials fails to listen they can become arrogant which can lead them to feeling that they are above the rules and laws set in effect. If you are a person of principal you need not fear listening to others and be willing to change a position if the truth leads in that path.

Here are a few ways a Public official can reach out.

1) Regularly appear on radio shows with those with differing points of view.

2) Hold regular public hearings and engage those constituents with their ideas

3) Have individuals with differing points of view as their advisors.

4) Work with individuals with different points of view to craft legislation so that their input is acknowledged.

5) Read various opinions on key issues

There are eerie similarities that between President Obama’s and President Nixon that appear to be ending in the same direction. I do not speak on these matters as one who wishes this to occur but as one who studies history. I’ve listed some of the parallels that are occurring today (below) and what might occur in the future.

1. President Obama and President Nixon both were trying to end unpopular wars.

2. Both Presidents had difficult economic conditions to deal with.

3. Both Presidents had scandals occur during their 2nd term campaigns.

4, President Nixon and President Obama had enemies list.

5. Their administrations had people take the fifth in front of Congress.

6. Both administration claimed political motives for the investigations.

ETC.  -THE FUTURE

1. Newspaper finds new deep throat

2. Republicans gain new seats in the Senate and the House

3. The Democratic party turns on Obama

4. Under pressure Obama is forced to resign.

It’s amazing in the current political cultural we live in that when a candidate says that they aren’t going to run again, that there must be a political scandal attached to that decisions. How about Michele Bachman and/or other politicians deciding that they are serving the public for a certain time period and then opening it up to others. I’m sure it can be draining to be a politician who takes strong positions against the current flow but maybe the individual beliefs like George Washington that politics isn’t truly about the person but the people.