I, of course, am
an American citizen, and I do not accept "carte blanche" the notion that he actually
"endangered national security." (Even though I am not "from Missouri," Missouri is
close-enough to my neighborhood for me to feel justified in saying: "Show Me.™"
Edward Snowden "revealed" a program that ... let's all be perfectly honest here ... every American/World citizen who pays the slightest bit of attention to the Internet already knew about.
It has been public information for a very long time that the US Government has built a massive data center in the wastelands of Nevada ... a data center that just happens to be bristling with Internet connections. We also
know about "map/reduce" and how Google works. It is, if I may bluntly say, perfectly obvious
that "the capacity to do this" has very-long existed. Therefore, it is also
"perfectly obvious" that Military Industrial contractors would have sold the US Government a ("Top Secret™", of course™ ...) multi-TRILLION DOLLAR contract "to do it."
They would need only one "justification": the dark and ominous-sounding utterance, "Nine-Wun-Wun."
- If you don't approve this thing, we'll plaster your district with "Senator so-and-so WANTS 9/11 TO HAPPEN AGAIN!!!!!!" billboards!
- If you do, then 10% of the profits will be waiting for you as 'legislative enablement fees' in the Grand Cayman Islands.
- ... "gee, that was easy."
Unfortunately, as we all know in our profession, "real
security is hard."
Very hard. And the first thing that we do, in order to maximize security, is to be totally open
about it. "There is no security in obscurity."
Yet, this thing is the penultimate example of "obscurity": total secrecy.
No public disclosure, hence no public discussion. An overwhelming profit motive
... not so much within the NSA Agency itself but rather within the legions of Military Industrialist contractors who supply
that Agency. A profit-motive that has no incentive to care whether or not a program succeeds,
so long as it is funded.
So, yeah, we have a lot
to be talking about here. Because, at the end of the day, we want to achieve
"National Security," not to be fleeced. It is not only "reasonable," but "critical,"
to Be From Missouri™ about everything
that is done "in the name of National Security." Hey, maybe the contractors are right! Nevertheless, we must
challenge it; prove it. We are the ultimate stakeholders here ... millions of us ... not them. If we are not holding their irons to the most-uncomfortable fire, no one else will.
On this web site, we have an entire subdivision devoted to security
. The principles that I am arguing here, I aver, are absolutely the same. (Just multiplied in importance billions of times.) If "John Public" does not
constantly shove its collective nose into these proceedings, and demand accountability, John's objective of "true
National Security" cannot,
I aver, be assured.
If the fat-cats are not incessantly haunted by
the ever-present certainty that "hundreds of millions(!) of Johns and Janes are watching," then they will not
uphold John's national interests. (Why? Because they're real-life greedy human "I've Got Mine!™" b*stards
... just like all
of us would be if we could swap places with 'em.)
(Yeah, yeah, yeah ... go ahead ... say it isn't so ... go ahead ... try.)