By Bob Barr
Wednesday, August 21, 2013
When Lord Acton noted famously in 1887 that, “power tends
to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely,” he could hardly have
imagined just how powerful the agencies of government would become a century
later, and just how apt his warning would be about the dangers of absolute
power.
Washington Post writer Barton Gellman reported last week
that the National Security Agency violates privacy restrictions on monitoring
innocent U.S. citizens thousands of times each year. This data comes not from
an outside organization with an axe to grind with the powerful eavesdropping
agency headquartered just outside the nation’s capitol in Ft. Meade, Maryland.
Rather, the incriminating evidence is found in an internal audit and other
classified reports that, as Gellman notes, provide a level of detail and
analysis of the NSA’s secret spy programs that is rarely (if ever) provided to
Congress, to the courts that supposedly oversee these programs, or to the
American people.
Rather than appreciate the seriousness of these privacy
lapses, the government considers them to be minor “errors” and attributes them
to the fact that its employees at NSA are “only human,” and work in a “complex
environment.” The government’s flippant attitude, thus revealed, should concern
all Americans; perhaps even more than should the thousands of annual violations
confirmed by the report.
For all of the “regulatory regimes” the NSA and its
supporters champion as safeguards to civil liberties, and despite President
Obama’s vow to open the process to scrutiny, there still is an utter lack of
transparency. Even the few Members of Congress made privy to classified NSA
program data, are given access under such severe constraints they cannot really
conduct in effective oversight. Moreover, it is highly unlikely these members
would be effective watch dogs in any event, insofar as members of the House and
Senate intelligence committees -- especially the top members from each party --
serve largely because of their strong support for the government’s intelligence
functions and agencies.
It is no secret that NSA spends untold billions each year
amassing the largest collection of electronic communications data in history,
and employs in its work the most sophisticated technology available anywhere in
the world. Thus, the Agency’s claim that the massive bulk collection of data is
necessary because it lacks sufficient technology, is particularly unconvincing.
For example, the NSA claims it is unable to “determine whether a foreign mobile
phone has entered the United States.” Given what we know about the level of
sophistication behind the government’s ability to track and monitor
communication devices, this claim hardly can be made with a straight face.
It is not only the fact that NSA snoops are collecting
data on innocent civilians that should concern citizens; it is that so little
is known about what data is collected, how long that data is stored, and for
what purposes it is eventually used. NSA Administrator General Keith Alexander
is a master of parsing words when it comes to answering questions about such
data. “We don’t hold data on U.S. citizens,” the four-star general stated
categorically before a congressional committee in June 2013. Equally gifted in
this game of words are Alexander’s colleagues, who “explained” his statement to
make it seem not factually incorrect -- claiming Alexander’s reference to
“data” did not cover “metadata.”
Yet, even the little we now know proves such statements
to be inaccurate. According to The Post report, the NSA’s own, internal printed
materials define “metadata” as being included in this “data.” Hiding violations
of U.S. law behind cleverly crafted word-games is unbefitting high government
officials, whether civilian or military. One easily is reminded of former
President Bill Clinton’s craven effort to avoid responsibility for perjury by
claiming, “[i]t all depends on what the meaning of ‘is’ is.”
The effort to deflect real scrutiny of NSA’s domestic
eavesdropping programs has touched members of Congress. Mike Rogers (R-Mich.),
Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, is under fire for allegedly
holding back crucial intelligence documents from his colleagues ahead of a key
vote in 2011 that renewed the PATRIOT Act; records that provided at least some
details about the bulk collection of records on U.S. citizens. Such action is
little different from what NSA officials apparently do to disguise the truth
about America’s secret snooping. NSA “tutorial” materials, for example,
describe how the Agency’s employees should deliberately hide details of their
work when they deal with FISA Court requirements (minimal as those limitations
are).
As more and more information is revealed, it becomes ever
clearer how little we actually know about the NSA’s surveillance of U.S.
citizens. However, as attorney Ken White writes at his civil liberties blog
Popehat, there are a few “Golden Rules” on which we always can rely when
analyzing the federal government’s spying powers. First, government will lie
about the scope of its surveillance programs. Second, government will lie about
the need to keep its surveillance programs secret. Third, government will lie
about how its surveillance programs are used. And finally, government will lie
about who and what is inevitably swept-up in its surveillance programs.
These most recent revelations illustrate clearly why it
is crucial for Congress to challenge executive authority on domestic
surveillance; and why it is time to break the inner circle of “Intelligence
Illuminati” who undermine congressional oversight. The courts have proven
unable, or unwilling, to challenge the legality of spy programs that involve
monitoring U.S. citizens. That means Congress is the only hope to finally put a
stop to unconstitutional snooping; however, Congress can only be effective by
refusing to be hoodwinked by the NSA’s systemic obfuscation, as the first step
toward rehabilitation.
No comments:
Post a Comment