Slashdot Mirror
NSA Overstepped the Law On Wiretaps
Hugh Pickens writes "The NY Times reports that legal and operational problems surrounding the NSA's surveillance activities have come under scrutiny from the Obama administration, Congressional intelligence committees, and a secret national security court, and that the NSA had been engaged in 'overcollection' of domestic communications of Americans. The practice has been described as significant and systemic, although one official said it was believed to have been unintentional. The Justice Department has acknowledged that there had been problems with the NSA surveillance operation, but said they had been resolved. The Office of the Director of National Intelligence, which oversees the intelligence community, did not address specific aspects of the surveillance problems, but said in a statement that 'when inadvertent mistakes are made, we take it very seriously and work immediately to correct them.' The intelligence officials said the problems had grown out of changes enacted by Congress last July to the law that regulates the government's wiretapping powers, as well as the challenges posed by enacting a new framework for collecting intelligence on terrorism and spying suspects. Joe Klein at Time Magazine says the bad news is that 'the NSA apparently has been overstepping the law,' but the good news is that 'one of the safeguards in the [FISA Reform] law is a review procedure that seems to have the ability to catch the NSA when it's overstepping — and that the illegal activities have been exposed, and quickly.'"
Nonsense! When a report about an agency of the government doing something illegal comes out, it is done not so that anyone doing anything illegal gets punished for it. Rather, it exists so that Congress can gently guide the NSA to stay inside the lines like a parent holding a retarded child's hand, trying to show them the proper way to color.
"Excuse me Mr. ISP, we need to get a tap on your network."
''Do you have a warrant?''
"Yes."
''May I see the warrant?''
"No, it's privileged."
''Ok, can you point me to a judge that authorized this?''
"No, it's privileged."
You don't see a problem with this? How about taken with the fact that law enforcement is legally allowed to lie in the course of their duties?
When a parent tells a child to commit a crime there isn't really a point to punish the kid. The government asked them to do something. Even if it is illegal the boss of the country asked them. It would be silly for the boss to then punish the kid for doing as told.
Tell that to the German officers who were executed for crimes against humanity, despite pleading their innocence on exactly these grounds.
This plea has since become known as the Nuremberg Defence. To my mind, it's no more compelling today than it was over 60 years ago, when we rejected it out of hand.
In order for a democracy to remain healthy, it requires the participation of its citizens. This means more than just occasionally visiting a polling station. It means that, from time to time, we will be asked to challenge, in very practical terms, the validity of the assumptions to which we all adhere.
I do not for a second believe that the NSA management and staff involved in this operation were not acutely aware that they were circumventing the law. If they knowingly broke the law, then they should be prepared to face the consequences.
Opposing the System usually comes with a price. I don't doubt that refusing to carry out orders would be a, uh, career-limiting decision. But those who willingly participate in an immoral, unethical and illegal system should face the consequences of their choice as well.
Crumb's Corollary: Never bring a knife to a bun fight.