Slashdot Mirror
Bringing Echelon In From the Cold
An anonymous reader writes: "UPI columnist James C. Bennett says that governments are going to spy no matter what. So he suggests that it would be better to admit that Echelon exists, and formulate some reasonable guidelines on such spying, than to pretend that it doesn't and let governments go about their business without any scrutiny. Interesting suggestion. But who will watch those watchers? And who will watch them? "
However, I am forced to question why the public suddenly cries out for oversight of Echelon and other NSA/CIA/FBI counterterrorism operations. Where are the victims of rogue G-men? Why have I never seen a single credible complaint against these intelligence agencies for violation of privacy? In other words, what's the harm of allowing them to intercept the transmissions that they intercept, if at best they are keeping us safer and at worst they are doing nothing at all? Obviously this isn't a monetary argument, as nobody actually knows what the NSA's budget is. To paraphrase Lisa Simpson - if a tree can hear everything you say, but it doesn't tell anyone you know, does it make a sound? The good Lord can hear you having phone sex on those 976 lines you call, so why does it matter if some government agent you'll never even meet can hear you too?
Although I don't want to be monitored, I'll gladly give up the right to complete privacy to stop the chance of a single future terrorist attack. After all, if we have nothing to hide and are not stigmatized for what we say in private, what does it matter who's listening?
WTC Survivor
What exactly can be done when the 'rules' of spying are not followed? Obviously, the game of intel/counter-intel is so secretive, that open trials for those breaking laws would be next to impossible. Military tribunals are probably unconstitutional for domestic spies. Better yet, how do you prosecute someone whose rule-breaking probably saved hundreds of lives? The overall question here is how does the intelligence community fit in with the ideals of any given country. Obviously, in the USA, this is embodied in our Constitution. So how does the intelligence community fit in with the Constitution, and how can it work effectively without crossing the line into illegal searches and other Constitutional violations?
-- "Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else."
In this proposal (to make Echelon more public and transparent), there is one indication up front that the author is a bit goofy. The rest of his suggestions lack common sense.
He says early on that the Japanese attack on Hawaii in 1941 was not all that secret--that the USA had some knowledge that it was about to occur, and fumbled the ball. This has never been demonstrated, but a lot of people believe it. There were some data which, in retrospect, looked consistent with an attack, and some mistakes were made (General Short made the biggest ones), but the truth is that no one knew what was going to happen and by the time a nonspecific warning was issued, it was too late to do anything much. The folks in Hawaii had no reason to believe it applied to them--in fact, they assumed they were safe by virtue of geography. We do know that the War Department figured the Philippines were the certain target (correct, but incomplete), that MacAruthur got the same warning Hawaii did, and that he ignored it. His incompetence was actually far greater than that of Admiral Kimmel, yet Kimmel was crucified and Mac became an icon. I digress.
A roughly parallel pattern emerges in the WTC attack. Looking back, we can see things that might have tipped us off that something nasty was up, but there is nothing clear and the target was not specified. (If it had been, someone in NSA would have said, "Well, duh, we knew that. What's new?") US intelligence services are awash in suggestive information; virtually all the time, it is impossible for them to predict based on this flood of hints, possibilities, suggestions, contradictory data and odd events.
There is one development a more public Echelon could not possibly address. The Bad Guys can flood the communications media with "smoke," bogus messages that will overwhelm the spooks and distract them. That becomes all the easier for the terrorists as the intelligence people come under political pressure not to ignore anything, to predict on the basis of incomplete information, and connect unrelated dots.
Finally, if Echelon has a new more public existence, its main functions will simply recede into the secretive background anyway. Net effect: either Zero, or possibly even detrimental.
IMHO Echelon may be doing a lot better job than we know. Recall the US general who was kidnapped in Italy by a bunch of self-styled Commies? A reporter said at one point that every single telephone in Italy was tapped. True or not, that feat was never referred to again. The general was recovered in one piece.
The author of this proposal to make Echelon into a more visible and therefore somehow more responsible organization is out to lunch.
The cute girl at the checkout counter who totally digs on you might be making a mistake as well, thinking that you have stinky feet rather than knowing the truth... that you use the foot powder on your dog's feet to cure a medical condition. After you leave the store, you call your friend and tell him you think George Bush is an ass and shouldn't be president.
Which situation is more likely to happen to you?... the girl at checkout counter doesn't agree to go out with you when you ask, or the FBI comes banging on your door because they misinterpreted your phone conversation to be about bombing the White House?
Time for a reality check. Try as we may, no one here is Martin Luther King or Einstein. And even if one of you were... think about the size of the public eye that would be on you anyway as one of these people. You'd probably be in the tabloids just as often as the FBI would listen to your fricking phone. So the government likes to watch... so do we, and who the hell cares?
Because throughout history almost every government has proven itself utterly uncapable of figuring out what information is relevant or not to identifying you as a threat.
They have this tendency to think that because someone reads a particular author, teaches or studies a particular subject, belongs to some demographic group or simply has friends/neighbors/relatives to whom any of the above apply, he or she is actively plotting against the government.
This happens most often in dictatorial regimes, but democracies are not immune, and the US has its history (cold war? remember?).
And then there are the times when they can't figure out that something is a joke. Like the FBI investigating bonsaikitten.com. I wonder if Tom Clancy is under constant surveillance...
Freedom is the freedom to say 2+2=4, everything else follows...