It's been an interesting couple of weeks as the person responsible for the NSA leaks came forward and in a kind of strange way tried to posture himself as someone not wanting to call attention to himself while in fact doing just that claiming that the American people needed to know what's going on with the NSA and quite frankly ratcheting up the fear game among people who have either been living under a rock, or willfully ignorant about world affairs and technology for the past 12 years. What's interesting about this whole thing is that NONE of what he disclosed is really a SECRET. It's common knowledge that the NSA has the capability to tap into anyones communications. The document that was released and started the whole mess was fairly vague, outlined specifically what couldn't be done with that information and was temporary in nature and most of all was non-identifying in and of itself. My first reaction was that the document was fake. It was hardly the kind of information that I would consider to be labeled as Top Secret NOFORN. Once upon a time I had such clearances, so I'm not speaking from a viewpoint of someone who doesn't know how the military intelligence machine operates.
Then.... further leaks came out. A program called PRISM which boastfully claimed unfettered direct access to ALL the major holders of information: Google, Microsoft, Yahoo, Apple...etc. To which I know is somewhat of a fabrication and then these companies came out in full force denying that claim as well as the NSA and other government agencies. It forced the Washington Post to redact and edit lot's of the information that Snowden was claiming once it found out that it wasn't really true.
Much was made about him being a hero of sorts and how smart he appeared in doing what he did. I've had quite a few conversations with various people about this and it breaks down like this: The people who have either worked for the government or military in some capacity with some sort of clearance pretty much tow the line that Snowden isn't nearly as bright as he purports himself to be. People without that background believe he is a hero standing up for the rights and freedoms that the government is no longer providing.
The truth as I see it is right down the middle of these two viewpoints. It is MY view and nothing more, draw your own conclusions. My argument is that if he was so reviled in the things that he saw and was a part of why did he not just leave and look to the private sector for work? After all he was a contractor and it would have been easy to do. He could have leaked the information anonymously like so many others and let the chips fall where they may. You see if he was THAT good, that would be easy to do as well.
He chose the route of the Martyr. I'm sorry if some feel that he is a hero and I will acknowledge that his disclosures most certainly got people talking and changes will be made based on his activities.
Now of course things just got better and better. While I don't see him as a hero, I certainly don't agree with everything the government is doing either.
Once all the tech companies called B.S. on PRISM as it was reported at least, they did a little disclosing of their own while simultaneously requesting permission to publicly release the amount of requests that they comply with. It was granted and it tells a story of tech companies not necessarily giving in too easy to government FISA requests, denying almost 30% of the requests they receive.
So what does THAT tell us? The holders of the data have ALL the power. NOT the government.
Honestly, I think the biggest defender of the NSA and it's policies the past couple of weeks is probably the LAST person to be talking about this stuff.
Dick Cheney, one of the architects of the BIGGEST intelligence snafu in recent history that led us to war with Iraq under the guise of weapons of mass destruction that didn't exist. The guy who wrote a tell all book that threw all kinds of people under the bus and was implicated in leaks that led to the outing of a CIA agent is hardly the kind of voice the NSA needs to defend itself. However, he did say some things that made a lot of sense and even he admits need to be looked at. For one why did a low-level system administrator have the kind of access that he did? Why is the NSA relying on contractors for this kind of work? Who else was working with him? All questions Cheney raised during an interview and quite valid ones. As I write this the government took well over a week to file charges against Snowden and of course the modern age moves faster than bureaucracy and Snowden just got up and left Hong Kong and Hong Kong let him go. There are all kinds of stories coming out now about where he is and our requests to various governments to hand him over and none of them too quick to react.
Here are the things that resonate with me over this whole debacle. We have a well established system of intelligence that's top heavy with bureaucrats and management who don't have a fundamental grasp on how technology really works and are probably clouded by political ideology. If one was to look at a mountain of data with an ideological slant, then one will find what they are looking for and be able to make a case for it. THAT is the danger of the NSA's data collecting activities. Making assumptions on data that COULD be different from reality and causing collateral damage on innocent citizens.
Does that mean we do away with the NSA? No, they have a job to do. Our job as citizens is to ensure that they do their job the right way. The intelligence community has grown exponentially since 9/11 and as such has grown too big for it's own good. While all their claims of thwarted attacks exist, there have also been some big failures. The recent attack on the Boston Marathon is a fresh example and this Snowden affair is another. It's a breakdown symptomatic of a large government agency that can't get out of it's own way.
When it comes to our government...
LESS Really is MORE.
