.
President Obama and the Demand for Universal Rights
The best way to advance universal rights abroad is to live by them at home. Recall that in the previous Congress, President Obama put forward a version of the Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act that would actually take away the existing legal protections for federal employees that raise concerns deemed to be minor or inadvertent.
Kerry calls Snowden ‘traitor’, warns Russia and China of impact on relations
(RT.com) – US Secretary of State John Kerry has said that America is not aware about the intended travel destination of former NSA contractor Edward Snowden but he “would be deeply troubled” if China and Russia knew about the whistleblower’s plans.
“There would be without any question some effect and impact on the relationship”with the US if this had taken place, John Kerry said at a news conference in New Delhi with the Indian Minister of External Affairs Salman Khurshid.
“There is a surrender treaty with Hong Kong and, if there was adequate notice, I don’t know yet what the communication status was, but if there was, it would be very disappointing if he was wilfully allowed to board an airplane as a result,”Mr. Kerry said. “With respect to Russia, likewise,” he added.
Kerry confirmed that the US has no information either about Snowden’s current whereabouts, nor about his travel plans.
“I would urge them (Russia and China) to live by the standards of the law because that’s in the interest of everybody,” Kerry added, recalling that in the last two years the US has transferred seven prisoners to Russia on request, “so I think reciprocity in the enforcement of the law is pretty important,”he concluded.
VIDEO: Kerry defends NSA’s controversial spying program, calls Snowden an indicted felon
Edward Snowden: saving us from the United Stasi of America by Daniel Ellsberg
(The Guardian) – In my estimation, there has not been in American history a more important leak than Edward Snowden’s release of NSA material– and that definitely includes the Pentagon Papers 40 years ago. Snowden’s whistleblowing gives us the possibility to roll back a key part of what has amounted to an “executive coup” against the US constitution.
The government claims it has a court warrant under Fisa – but that unconstitutionally sweeping warrant is from a secret court, shielded from effective oversight, almost totally deferential to executive requests. As Russell Tice, a former National Security Agency analyst, put it: “It is a kangaroo court with a rubber stamp.”
There are legitimate reasons for secrecy, and specifically for secrecy about communications intelligence. That’s why Bradley Mannning and I – both of whom had access to such intelligence with clearances higher than top-secret – chose not to disclose any information with that classification. And it is why Edward Snowden has committed himself to withhold publication of most of what he might have revealed.
More below the fold …
But what is not legitimate is to use a secrecy system to hide programs that are blatantly unconstitutional in their breadth and potential abuse. Neither the president nor Congress as a whole may by themselves revoke the fourth amendment – and that’s why what Snowden has revealed so far was secret from the American people.
In 1975, Senator Frank Church spoke of the National Security Agency in these terms:
“I know the capacity that is there to make tyranny total in America, and we must see to it that this agency and all agencies that possess this technology operate within the law and under proper supervision, so that we never cross over that abyss. That is the abyss from which there is no return.”
The dangerous prospect of which he warned was that America’s intelligence gathering capability – which is today beyond any comparison with what existed in his pre-digital era – “at any time could be turned around on the American people and no American would have any privacy left.”
“When national security is invoked in the United States, that is what we now have. In effect, Congress has delegated its responsibilities and powers to the executive. The oversight structure has been shown to be a total sham: the congressional committees concerned have been totally co-opted. They are simply black holes of information that the public needs to know.
The surveillance revealed by Snowden’s disclosures exposes this executive coup: that this is done with Congress briefed, but without the ability to resist or even debate the measures openly, makes a mockery of the separation of powers. What has been created is the infrastructure of a police state.”
Will Snowden Hijack Obama’s Agenda and Presidency? by Richard Silverstein
(Tikun Olam) – The surprising news that Edward Snowden escaped Hong Kong, apparently with the connivance of the Chinese authorities, and arrived in Moscow (with the connivance of Vladimir Putin), made me realize that this international incident has taken on overtones of old-fashioned Cold War cloak and dagger. The principles that motivated Snowden to become a whistle-blower and expose the massive international spying and data-mining of the NSA, are rapidly being subsumed by geopolitical maneuvering from Washington DC to Beijing to Moscow.
These great powers should begin to realize that they each have interests that could be served by reaching a resolution of this impasse. Way back in the old days (and even as recently as a few years ago), when we had somebody of theirs and they had somebody of ours there was a prisoner exchange. So why not now, in this situation?
…
If anyone wants to argue that a Snowden prosecution would be similar to the Manning prosecution, I disagree. They can’t try Snowden in Guantanamo. They’d have to try him in a U.S. court. Further, Manning is a soldier and most Americans object to a soldier doing what he did. But Snowden, despite working for spooks, is a civilian. No amount of yammering from Keith Alexander about the danger Snowden exposed our agents to will convince Americans that his whistle-blowing didn’t have an important principle at its root.
Benjamin Franklin on Freedom and Security of a Nation
(A Nihil Nation) – Just as evil is but a banality, so is heroism! Heroism is not at all some romantic concept, but rather -like anything else in life- it happens by pure accident; the hero is not this person chosen by the gods and carrying a divine sword of justice, much rather he is an ordinary person who just happens to be struck by a sudden thought or need. The banality of heroism arises in a moment of accidental clarity, a moment in which suddenly we are thrown outside of our regular routine and we are struck by something that would have been otherwise missed.
Edward Snowden is a hero to some, yet others call him a traitor. The first question to be asked is simple: why should we consider him a traitor? By definition (within this context), to betray means that one is privy to something within one’s own country and then to sell it to another. Within the context of the Snowden case two issues immediately arise to the defense; (1) Edward Snowden did not sell ideas but published them and (2) what he did was in service to the people. Especially this second point is crucial; if the government says that Snowden is a traitor, then this is only because the government imagines it is above the people; as such the Obama administration seeks charges because it falsely imagines that they are the United States of America (and consequently that the people belong to them).
Ben Franklin’s quote “Those who would sacrifice freedom for security deserve neither”
If Benjamin Franklin talked about essential liberty rather than freedom itself, then this is because there can be no society without there being an at least preliminary idea of security. Society always implies security, a society that did not have any idea of security attached to it is impossible because without security there is only the wilderness. Security is needed for the wellbeing of society, there is however a difference between the concept of `society’ and the concept of `state’; even anarchism does not operates within the concept of society even though it denies the concept of the state.
In spite of its name the United States of America is founded upon principles that go against Statism, hence the motto: land of the free. The idea of a State is however difficult to avoid, there must always be security in order for there to be society, and it is in this paradox that we may find the birth of Federalism, the United States of America is a collection of States yet in itself it is not a state. The job of the federal government is first and foremost to ensure freedom!