Friends and enemies, I think out loud here. I ask for your patience. My world changed on June 7, 2013. The NSA revelations. I struggle to articulate. In the statements below are some of the issues I've thought about:
If I cheat on my wife and she doesn't find out has my wife been harmed?
If you don't get caught have you committed a crime, like Judah in Crimes and Misdemeanors?
"respondents have no actual knowledge of the Government's § 1881a targeting practices." (Clapper v Amnesty International USA, 133 S.Ct. 1138.)
"respondents can only speculate as to how the Attorney General and the Director of National Intelligence will exercise their discretion in determining which communications to target." (Clapper.)
"It can...be argued...that if the NSA Wiretapping Program had never leaked out, it would have caused no threat to intellectual privacy." (N.M. Richards, "The Dangers of Surveillance, Harvard Law Review, 2013.)
"It can...be argued...that if the NSA Wiretapping Program had never leaked out, it would have caused no threat to intellectual privacy." (N.M. Richards, "The Dangers of Surveillance, Harvard Law Review, 2013.)
"Mere surveillance creates no harms." (Richards.)
"Challenges to the NSA’s wiretapping program have foundered because plaintiffs have failed to convince federal courts that secret surveillance has caused them any legally-cognizable injury." (Richards.)
No harm, no foul.
No harm, no foul.
"if the Government were to prosecute one of respondent-attorney's foreign clients using § 1881a-authorized surveillance, the Government would be required to make a disclosure." (Clapper.)
Consent
"you and I haven’t figured out what it is we want our government to do or what it is we will let our government do." (Michael Hayden, former director of CIA and NSA.)
Consent
"you and I haven’t figured out what it is we want our government to do or what it is we will let our government do." (Michael Hayden, former director of CIA and NSA.)
Why isn't government secret seizure and storage of personal data without consent of the owner theft? Because the government did it via laws. Is "because the government did it via laws" sufficient to make it...right? Is what is "right," "moral" a test for government programs? For this government program? If it was legal, does that end the "test?"
The Obama administration says NSA surveillance was legal, approved by Congress and thus indirectly consented to by the American people, and not "really" secret either because Congress was aware of it. What crimes or misdemeanors are committed by one who makes really public a legal, not really secret program that was consented to by the American people?
"Edward Joseph Snowden (born June 21, 1983) is an American computer specialist who worked for the CIA and the NSA..." according to Wikipedia. Since Snowden worked for the CIA and NSA, was Snowden "the government?" If he was, then why weren't his disclosures "legal" as made by the government. If Snowden was not "the government" for NSA-disclosure purposes and his disclosures were therefore illegal, who is "the government" who can disclose legally? The Guardian is not the government. How can Edward Snowden be prosecuted for disclosure to Glenn Greenwald and Greenwald and The Guardian not be prosecuted for disclosure to the world? Surely, President Obama is "the government." Could Obama then legally disclose the NSA programs? Did he do that indirectly when he confirmed the existence of the programs after Snowden's disclosures? Is Senator Diane Feinstein "the government?" Was her disclosure-by-confirmation therefore legal? Is every member of Congress "the government" for you-can-disclose purposes? Then why weren't they allowed to? Senator Ron Wyden knew of the NSA surveillance, was troubled by it, asked Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, "Does the NSA collect any type of data at all on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans?" (Clapper lied and said "No.") Wyden knew the answer was "yes," but didn't feel he could follow up. If Wyden had responded by telling Clapper he knew Clapper was lying, that NSA did collect data on millions of Americans, would Wyden's disclosure-by-confrontation have been legal? Or, are only those members of Congress who disclose and defend NSA "the government" who can legally disclose? Surely, Clapper, the Director of National Intelligence, is "the government?" Then why didn't he disclose-by-answering-truthfully? If Clapper is not "the government" then who is? If even "the government" can't disclose and Clapper gave the only "legal" answer he could by lying then did Obama, Feinstein, et al, illegally disclose?
The Obama administration says NSA surveillance was legal, approved by Congress and thus indirectly consented to by the American people, and not "really" secret either because Congress was aware of it. What crimes or misdemeanors are committed by one who makes really public a legal, not really secret program that was consented to by the American people?
"Edward Joseph Snowden (born June 21, 1983) is an American computer specialist who worked for the CIA and the NSA..." according to Wikipedia. Since Snowden worked for the CIA and NSA, was Snowden "the government?" If he was, then why weren't his disclosures "legal" as made by the government. If Snowden was not "the government" for NSA-disclosure purposes and his disclosures were therefore illegal, who is "the government" who can disclose legally? The Guardian is not the government. How can Edward Snowden be prosecuted for disclosure to Glenn Greenwald and Greenwald and The Guardian not be prosecuted for disclosure to the world? Surely, President Obama is "the government." Could Obama then legally disclose the NSA programs? Did he do that indirectly when he confirmed the existence of the programs after Snowden's disclosures? Is Senator Diane Feinstein "the government?" Was her disclosure-by-confirmation therefore legal? Is every member of Congress "the government" for you-can-disclose purposes? Then why weren't they allowed to? Senator Ron Wyden knew of the NSA surveillance, was troubled by it, asked Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, "Does the NSA collect any type of data at all on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans?" (Clapper lied and said "No.") Wyden knew the answer was "yes," but didn't feel he could follow up. If Wyden had responded by telling Clapper he knew Clapper was lying, that NSA did collect data on millions of Americans, would Wyden's disclosure-by-confrontation have been legal? Or, are only those members of Congress who disclose and defend NSA "the government" who can legally disclose? Surely, Clapper, the Director of National Intelligence, is "the government?" Then why didn't he disclose-by-answering-truthfully? If Clapper is not "the government" then who is? If even "the government" can't disclose and Clapper gave the only "legal" answer he could by lying then did Obama, Feinstein, et al, illegally disclose?
