Hello, all. I'm finally writing again.
I'm sure you've all heard- some Defense contractor, Edward Snowden, has released documents detailing the National Security Agency's massive wiretapping program. We all knew something of this sort was happening, and that it is probably unconstitutional, but the Supreme Court ruled earlier that any effort to put an injunction on this program depended on having proof that it was operating to begin with- proof whose exposure was illegal. Snowden apparently sought the job looking to expose as much of our government's espionage program as he could. Whatever his motivations, I'm glad he did.
For many like me, the Bush administration's massive wiretaps program was one of the main reasons to rally behind an early anti-war candidate in 2008. To a large extent, I supported Obama then because of his willingness to challenge the country's foreign policy consensus of long wars of occupation, torture, airstrikes on civilian targets, and stifling dissent, all while ignoring the bill of rights. Now we find that, as with the bombing campaigns, torture, and military occupations Obama has not only allowed wiretapping to continue but has apparently expanded it. This was all enabled by the FISA bill, passed early in his first term, setting up a quasilegal framework for constant surveillance. This was one of the first signs I noticed that I'd been had. (I'm sure there were earlier signs, but this was one of the first I noticed). Essentially, every phone call's source, destination, and duration are being recorded, while google, facebook and yahoo do the same with web patterns. Journalists' phones, in particular, are constantly tapped in the Justice Department's ongoing effort to end the practice of public disclosure of misdeeds, and it's not hard to see the massive data stockpile being used to selectively enforce laws against social elements labelled "undesirable", or simply to further enrich the security state, or haul more people off to for-profit prisons. Whatever the goal of the program, it offers an abundance of personal information that has never previously been the domain of the state to our government. Moreover, the Democrats who took office claiming rightly that the Republican programs had shredded our political liberties have now become ardent defenders of those same programs. I blame most of the party, but the onus of blame falls especially hard on those who led us to believe something else- namely the president and Attorney General Holder, as well as hardline Democratic hawks like Diane Feinstein, who has quickly become a caricature of herself in this affair.
Whether you support or oppose a surveillance state, I hope you agree with me that we need to discuss the emergence of one openly, with public knowledge of our government's decisions. this alone makes Snowden a hero.
The really depressing side of this, though, is the extent the Western World has gone to to apprehend Snowden. Stranded in Moscow's airport, most of Western Europe forbade Bolivian President Evo Morales' plane from returning home until they had searched it, on the pretense that he was smuggling Snowden to safety. Putting aside the laughable notion that a president as hawkish as Obama would not simply send in a (Reagan in Grenada style or Bush in Panama style) military raid on any country brave enough to harbor an American political refugee, this is a gross violation of international sovereignty. How would we react if our president was arbitrarily stopped in a foreign country and all his effects searched by jackbooted thugs? For the record, Morales is pretty awesome- imagine a Native American Hugo Chavez, albeit without the benefits or corruption of oil. The mere suspicion of Morales supporting Snowden was sufficient to suspend the rights of the president of a sovereign nation. The disappointing side of this, of course, is the extent to which the agenda of European states I like to believe are at least somewhat enlightened, states like France, Spain, Italy and Austria, coincided with that of our own government. The other service Snowden has performed in his flight is to show once more the arrogance of the American government, which has always sought to project its will globally, whether it be tearing down governments that support economic sufficiency for their populations, monopolizing the oil and arms trade, or repealing environmental treaties, now for the moment frustrated in its effort to apprehend the man who revealed its latest misdeed. With the spectre of Chelsea Manning's permanent suicide watch- namely, constant restraints in prison from which she will never be permitted to emerge alive, Snowden's flight is the only sensible path for a whistleblower who has not yet given up the fight. My heart goes out to him and any state willing to shelter him (well, maybe not Putin's Russia). Whatever the case, the public still has the right to know.
Solidarität, mein Genossen und Genossinnen
Genosse Graham
Agreed. I may not agree with Snowden on his methods (a more tactful disclosure would perhaps have been better) I do agree that the reaction to his leaks was unwarranted and arrogant. Detaining Evo Morales in Europe was mortifying, and quite frankly I am surprised he has not declared war on the country which detained him. Given that he had earlier stated quite plainly that Snowden was NOT in his country, there was no reason for it. If Morales had been harboring him (which anyone familiar with Morales would have been smart enough to realize was patently false), making an extradition agreement would have been better for all involved. But of course the United States and Europe cannot possibly bargain with a Latin American President, that would mean they were like, our equals or something.
ReplyDelete