Blanket surveillance is about covering up government corruption and chilling free speech, not catching terrorists
Alex Jones & Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
June 13, 2013
The NSA’s vast wiretapping and surveillance operation, in addition
to the agency’s attempt to intimidate the media and whistleblowers from
releasing information about programs such as PRISM, has has virtually nothing to
do with catching terrorists and everything to do with creating a chilling effect
that dissuades the free press from exposing government corruption while making
Americans fearful of engaging in political free speech.
The myth that blanket NSA spying is primarily concerned with
catching terrorists, or that terrorists will be aided by people like Edward
Snowden blowing the whistle on the PRISM program, has been debunked by numerous
experts.
Firstly, the threat posed to Americans by terrorism is grossly
exaggerated and overhyped. Americans are more likely to be killed by toddlers than terrorists.
Intestinal illnesses, allergic reactions to peanuts, bee stings, drowning in the
bath, or accident-causing deer all individually pose a greater threat to Americans than
terrorists. So the whole debate about sacrificing privacy for security is a
total fraud to begin with.
As the former head of the National Security Agency’s global
digital data gathering program – William Binney – confirmed, the witch hunt
targeting Edward Snowden is not about preventing terrorists from discovering how
they are being tracked by the NSA, it is about preventing the American people
from finding out about the unconstitutional actions of the NSA.
“The terrorists have already known that we’ve been doing this for
years, so there’s no surprise there. They’re not going to change the way they
operate just because it comes out in the U.S. press. I mean, the point is, they
already knew it, and they were operating the way they would operate anyway. So,
the point is that they’re—we’re not—the government here is not trying to protect
it from the terrorists; it’s trying to protect it, that knowledge of that
program, from the citizens of the United States,” said Binney.
This sentiment was echoed by top counter-terrorism czar Richard
Clarke, who remarked, “The argument that this sweeping search must be kept
secret from the terrorists is laughable. Terrorists already assume this sort of
thing is being done. Only law-abiding American citizens were blissfully ignorant
of what their government was doing.”
Innumerable lawmakers on both sides of the aisle who have called
for Ed Snowden to be arrested for revealing the existence of PRISM have done do
under the justification that Snowden is aiding terrorists by tipping them off to
the fact that the NSA is spying on them and therefore harming national security.
Yet as Clarke and Binney highlight, this is a moot point – it was already known
by everyone – therefore there must be a different reason for the persecution of
Snowden and his ilk.
The reason for the persecution of whistleblowers and media outlets
who leak evidence of government wrongdoing is to intimidate the free press and
make them less likely to publish information about government corruption for
fear of legal reprisals.
This is an easily understood consequence of the persecution of
Edward Snowden and yet it has barely been touched upon in the aftermath of the
PRISM scandal.
As William Binney explains, government officials are only mad at Snowden
because his revelations expose their wrongdoing. This has nothing to do with
genuine concerns about national security or terrorism.
Data is being obtained by the NSA unencrypted so that no probable
cause is needed for the agency to access that data – meaning the system has been
set up for political and not practical purposes.
As Thomas Drake, former senior NSA executive and a decorated Air
Force and Navy veteran remarks, the government is incensed at Snowden and the
media outlets who carried his story because Snowden exposed how the NSA is
acting in “direct violation of the fourth amendment of the US constitution,” and
how the NSA is “subverting the constitution.”
Despite the fact that whistleblowers are helping to expose
wrongdoing in government – and the polls show they are supported by the majority of the
American people – the Obama administration has prosecuted more whistleblowers than all other presidents
combined.
As all the experts agree, this isn’t being done to protect America
from terrorists, it is being done to intimidate insiders from coming forward and
speaking out against government corruption in the fear that they will end up
like Bradley Manning – locked away in solitary confinement for years.
Telephones belonging to AP reporters are also being tapped to
discourage other news organizations from reporting on government misdeeds.
Individual reporters like James Rosen are also being targeted by the Obama
administration, making potential sources who have information on government
wrongdoing less likely to approach journalists.
The NSA’s huge illegal dragnet also has an additional consequence
– implanting a seed of doubt in the minds of average Americans seeking to
exercise their first amendment right to criticize the government. Could they
become a target of blanket surveillance and wiretapping? Could their private
life be exposed by a resentful NSA official if they dare to become a nuisance to
the feds? Could they be accidentally mistaken for a terrorist if they send an
email to another person who is under suspicion?
The Obama administration’s war on whistleblowers and the NSA and
other federal agency’s role in spying on reporters and average Americans has
nothing to do with stopping terrorists and everything to do with intimidating
the media, creating a chilling effect that makes insiders who have clear
evidence of government corruption far less likely to go public, and making
Americans think twice before they criticize the government or exercise their
constitutional rights.
No comments:
Post a Comment