You're right of course: it was a facile reply of mine, particularly on here. It's how we respond that matters.
On 30 Jun 2013, at 04:10, "Jacob Appelbaum" <[email protected]> wrote: > Paul Bernal (LAW): >> None of this should be surprising, should it? It's a reasonable >> assumption that all intelligence agencies share their data on a >> pretty regular basis - certainly with 'friendly' nations, and almost >> certainly with others, on a quid pro quo basis. It's always been that >> way. > > Hi, > > Whenever I see this kind of response I wonder, is it a surprise that > people are robbed? Or that wars kill innocent people? Is it a surprise > that our governments spy on us? Is it a surprise that people are > sexually assaulted? It is a surprise that computers get hacked? That > bankers who pillage walk free? > > I wonder though - do such people who may or may not be surprised - do > they have any other thoughts? > > Would you tell a victim of the Stasi - "I'm not surprised you were > harassed!" or would you tell a friend who was beaten for being gay "I'm > not surprised you were beaten up!" > > Is there a thought that comes after that lack of surprise? > > One wonders if some cynical feelings might smother all other thinking. > > What comes after surprise? Do you - for example - think it is wrong? Do > you - for example - want it to be this way? > > All the best, > Jacob > -- > Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by > emailing moderator at [email protected] or changing your settings at > https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech -- Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at [email protected] or changing your settings at https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
