Why it is Important that NSA not Store our Phone Contacts . . .

Much ado about nothing–so the wisdom goes about the President’s press conference today on our intelligence collection efforts, both foreign and domestic . . .

As the Bloomberg review on television said, even before it happened, no president holds a press conference the week before the State of the Union address on any subject that he finds substantive (he would save that for the State of the Union address . . .).  He only held this press conference because people have been pushing him to say something on the subject.  

So, with that in mind, let’s see what was not said.  There is no push from the president nor is there an executive order stating that NSA must leave networks of phone contacts, telephone metadata and content, etc. at the respective telephone companies, retrieving it, when necessary, via a warrant.  

And why would that matter, one might ask?

Because private companies are not usually easy to use to punish one’s political enemies, whereas the Defense Department, which belongs to the executive branch of our government, could very well be used in this way.

And if that seems okay to you because, after all, your party is currently in power, think about when they are not.  Do you seriously want to have to worry all the rest of your life about political payback via the revealing of phone records, patterns of calls, and content of calls?

Even those of us who think extramarital affairs and other sneaky things are reprehensible do not really wish to live in a place where political enemies are brought down, not by bad legislation, but by being followed via phone records till they slip up somewhere!

Can you say police state?

And, yes, I am aware of this having been done in the past, for example, when the FBI followed Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. around.  

But the past didn’t have our technology, able to account for every moment of someone’s day in great detail.  

Oh, brave new world!

Edward Snowden as the Canary in the Coal Mine . . .

Edward Snowden as the Canary in the Coal Mine . . .

Every few months I have to recalibrate with Eugene Robinson in order to realize that this liberal writer and I agree completely on the role of the National Security Agency and the fact that they have gone far beyond that role, funded by our taxpayer dollars to collect against our own citizenry, no less!!!

Edward Snowden had to be. Whether he is a traitor, I will leave to someone more nuanced than myself.

He did need to fill the role of whistleblower. And of canary in the coal mine.

He may never be able to come back to the States. I think he realized that possibility when he did what he did. He counted the cost and . . . did what he did anyway.

What if we had never found out that the NSA is collecting on virtually every electronic move made by every resident of this land, as well as many people overseas? And that it is storing the data for quick recall later if they ever suspect one of us of anything.

As Mr. Robinson says, this data is always available after the fact with a warrant.

But the NSA wants their collection to be effortless. And apparently warrantless.

I like Mr. Robinson’s statement that it is supposed to be inconvenient (to the government) to invade our privacy!!!

When Liberal Eugene Robinson and Conservative Mary Martin Agree . . .

When Liberal Eugene Robinson and Conservative Mary Martin Agree . . .

I am still very concerned about the idea that the government/NSA can justify snooping into anyone’s private communications based on “three degrees of association with a terrorist.”  The way it works is:  1) anyone who is in contact with a terrorist can be examined without warrant 2) anyone who is in contact with anyone in #1 can be examined without a warrant and 3) anyone who is in contact with anyone in #2 can be examined without a warrant.  The Virginian-Pilot detailed this last week, while we were on vacation, but any news service you google will have it.  Don’t take my word for it. Research it for yourself!

As the cartoon accompanying Mr. Robinson’s editorial reads:  “You have the right to remain silent.  Anything you say on your cellphone or type on your computer or file with the IRS can be used against you . . .” (not funny, but a good reminder of what we are letting ourselves in on!).  

Should the Director of National Intelligence be Fired?

Should the Director of National Intelligence be Fired?

It is interesting to see what James Clapper, our Director of National Intelligence (DNI) now says about the infamous interview earlier this year in which he denied that the National Security Agency (NSA) was collecting data on American citizens:

“I thought, though in retrospect, I was asked [a] ‘when are you going to … stop beating your wife’ kind of question, which is … not answerable necessarily by a simple yes or no. So I responded in what I thought was the most truthful, or least untruthful, manner by saying, ‘No.’ ”

Truthiness. It is a problematic thing, no?

Time was when military folks with a security clearance would answer any open question with “I can neither confirm nor deny that, Sir.” And those who pounced on that answer, when given to certain questions, as proof positive that the person had just confirmed something by refusing to answer, were regarded as loose cannons. They could publish whatever they wanted. No one from the Department of Defense was going to play their game nor address their rumors.

Now apparently we have advanced to a more clever stance. At least the DNI has. He is trying to figure out what might be in the minds of his audience after he “neither confirms nor denies” something. He then regards it as his job to spin whatever it is that he projects is residing in the minds of his audience.

Nonsense.

The good old “neither confirm nor deny” phrase still works if everyone uses it. It only stops working when people only use it as shorthand for “there is nothing to see here, folks. Move along . . .”

I do not know whether the DNI should be fired. I will leave that to people at higher paygrades than me .

However, I do know that I do not appreciate being condescended to by a public servant who feels that lying to the American public about data that pertains to us (and, really, belongs to us) is appropriate as “the least untruthful thing” to do.

To My Friends at NSA . . .

I have been having a lot of fun on my Facebook page these past 36 hours since the UK’s Guardian broke the news that virtually any communication we send via Google, Facebook, Microsoft, YouTube, Apple, Skype, and more can be swept up directly by our National Security Agency in a vast and growing overreach of what the Patriot Act intended. No warrant needed. They have direct access to the servers. Trust us, would we target U.S. citizens?

Well, um, my Facebook page does not give my citizenship. Not everyone lives in the country of their birth so, yeah, I think even good intentions could lead to abuse here. We are naive to think otherwise.

And tens of millions of innocent foreigners have Facebook accounts run through a U.S. server feeding into NSA. What about them? Should they trust the U.S. government to be reasonable in interpreting their communications? We operate drones, you know. Easy to make a mistake with them.

So I have been tacking notes to NSA on to my Facebook posts.

I am a blogger. Anyone can read my blog, no warrant required.

I am pretty sure I will always be such small potatoes that I will stay off NSA’s radar. But still. It is the principle after all.

My goal is to get us to agitate enough that Congress will relook at the Patriot Act and modify its sweeping powers to collect on innocent citizens.

Maybe they will even read it all this time.

The Constitution, ya know?