I know it is hard to admit but just about any government in the world is spying on its citizens. Sure, we have a false sense of security that we are “protected” and such a thing would never happen but it has become very clear that it seems to be a common thing these days.

Technology is helping drive the events in Iran right now. People are using Facebook, Twitter and other social networking sites in order to send messages, inform others about events, and help organize protests, all the while mobile phones show the rest of the world video of what is happening on the streets of Tehran as people send video in near real time to YouTube.

Just as the protesters are using technology, so is the Iranian government.

But Nokia Siemens says the product is only being used, in Iran, for the monitoring of local telephone calls on fixed and mobile lines.

Rather than just block traffic, it is understood that the monitoring system can also interrogate data to see what information is being passed back and forth.

A spokesman described the system as “a standard architecture that the world’s governments use for lawful intercept”.

Oh, yea, to pop your security bubble:

“Western governments, including the UK, don’t allow you to build networks without having this functionality.”

So much for freedom of speech.

Several weeks back the news was a buzz about Miss California, Carrie Prejean.  Not because she actually won anything but because she made specific comments about gay marriage – more specifically, the fact that her interpretation of faith did not allow for gay marriage.  

Well, her comments – she says – caused her the crown of Miss USA.

Today the web is abuzz with “revealing pictures” of Carrie Prejean.  Apparently, when she first started modeling Ms. Prejean took some nude photos.  But where they nude?  Here is the photo in question via The Dirty.com.  (Yes, this is safe for work)

Because of this picture the Miss California USA officials are thinking of stripping her of her title.  

Frankly, I don’t care if she posed nude or semi-nude.  It really doesn’t concern me.  What gets me here is that I think – really think – this young woman is being penalized for her views. Because she said something unpopular now the “news” is digging into her past, looking for something to really hang her on.

Carrie Prejean stood up for what she believes in and the the world is chastising her.  Based off of her comments and this single picture, I don’t think she deserves the negative press she is getting.  Yes, she has made herself a public figure…but is this really the “Freedom of Speech” we want in the United States?

Listen, she could say her views on faith allow for midget tossing while smoking a bong on the 3rd Sunday of ever second month. Just because one doesn’t care for what she is saying, or believe what she is saying, doesn’t give them the right to attack her.  Do we want to let a segment of the population rip others apart simply because they were not happy with something that was said?  

Bottom line, if what someone says isn’t criminal speech, why do we, the general public, allow such behavior to take place?

In my view of the world Freedom of Speech means the ability to say speak without limitation or censorship by the government, as long as I am not causing danger to the lives of others.

If I desire to walk around every day and use the word tits as a substitute for the word good – as in “You did tits job with the presentation today, Jim” or “Those are some tits people” – I want to.  Sure, I may sound like an asinine fool while doing so, but I want to have the ability if I so choose.

Apparently South Carolina State Senator Robert Ford feels that I should not have this ability if I ever visit their beautiful state. He is trying to pass legislation that would outlaw profanity.  If one happens to break said law, a jail sentence up to 5 years and/or a fine up to $5,000 may be coming your way.

I see a number of issues with this, obviously, but a big problem with the proposed legislation – outside of that whole I want to say what I want thing – is that it does not clearly delineate what is considered profane.  Also, it does not take into account the conditions under which the language was used.

We have to remember that Freedom of Speech, as defined under the 1st Amendment, is not without limits.  That is to say Freedom of Speech is not absolute.  According to the Supreme Court, Freedom of Speech does not include:

• Burning draft cards to protest draft
• Words likely to incite imminent violence
• Words immediately jeopardizing national security
• Newspaper publishing false and defamatory material

I don’t see how tits would fall into those four categories, do you?

I want to have the ability to use whatever language I decide that is appropriate for the situation and let the world view me however it so decides to because of my usage of vulgar words. Such laws create a dangerous environment allowing the government to restrict other activities, which has the potential to lead society down a very dangerous (and absurd) path.

Do I think this will pass?  No.  I believe that if this is all Mr. Ford can focus on, the people who voted him into office need to ask if he is truly serving their best interest. It’s not like there is economic turmoil that needs to be addressed right now…

That said, I think people who want to restrict or control how others think and/or speak need to fornicate off.