I’m a member of a Facebook group called United States Navy Cryptologic Technicians. Last week a member authored a post which questioned why NSA leaker Edward Snowden wasn’t being hunted down with all available resources. It spawned a very lively debate amongst ex-spooks about Snowden’s motives and those of the NSA, a debate which continues as I post this. There are many former spooks like myself who find the NSA’s new reach to be quite alarming, while others seem to be comfortable with Americans’ almost complete lack of online privacy. Several point out that Snowden took an oath to protect this information and broke his oath.
I took a similar oath when gained my security clearance. Like every other servicemember, however, the first oath I took was support and defend the Constitution of the United States “against all enemies, foreign and domestic.” To the extent that the latter conflicts with the former, the former (being the law of the land) always takes precedence. In addition, it was drilled into us as sailors that it was our duty to disobey an unlawful order. In hindsight this is far easier to say than do, as in practice disobeying a lawful order would most likely put you in a world of hurt. At least the government would come out looking good during your court-martial.
The Facebook debate centers on the nuances of what’s considered legal in the post-9/11 world. I believe we’ve gone too far in favor of privacy intrusion, and I’ve felt that way since the towers first fell. Yes, we can monitor everyone in the United States, but that doesn’t mean we should. That doesn’t make it morally right. The cost outweighs the benefits. In a supposedly free society, are we not entitled to freedom from suspicion?
I believe any data gathered by the government from an American citizen without their knowledge or consent is a potential violation of their privacy. I believe gathering metadata that documents an American’s contacts without his consent is almost certainly a violation of his privacy. To call this metadata “business records” is a weak attempt to circumvent the Fourth Amendment.
I don’t believe the NSA willingly violates the law. Rather, I believe we as a society have been too willing to cede our privacy when crafting these new laws. It’s high time we stop debating whether Snowden is wrong or the NSA is wrong and start debating the extent to which we want our privacy legally protected.