<div dir="ltr">When the tide goes out, we see who is not wearing a bathing suit...<br><div><div class="gmail_quote"><br>
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div>
<div>
<h1>Edward Snowden: saving us from the
United Stasi of America</h1>
<p>Snowden's
whistleblowing gives us a chance to roll back what is
tantamount to an 'executive coup' against the US constitution</p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<ul>
<li> <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/daniel-ellsberg" rel="author" target="_blank"> <img src="cid:part1.05020208.07080501@bluewin.ch" alt="Daniel
Ellsberg" title="Contributor picture" height="60" width="60"> </a> </li>
<li>
<ul>
<li>
<div> <span><span><a rel="author" href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/daniel-ellsberg" target="_blank">Daniel
Ellsberg</a></span></span> </div>
</li>
<li> <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/" target="_blank">guardian.co.uk</a>, <u></u>Monday 10 June 2013 11.30 BST<u></u> </li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>
<div>
<div>
<p>In my estimation, there has not been in American history a
more important leak than <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/09/edward-snowden-nsa-whistleblower-surveillance?guni=Network%20front:network-front%20full-width-1%20bento-box:Bento%20box:Position1" target="_blank">Edward
Snowden's release of NSA material</a> – and that includes
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentagon_Papers" target="_blank">the
Pentagon Papers, for which I was responsible 40 years ago</a>.
Snowden's whistleblowing gives us the possibility to roll
back what has amounted to an "executive coup" against the US
constitution.</p>
<p>Since 9/11, there has been, at first secretly but
increasingly openly, a revocation of the bill of rights for
which this country fought 200 years ago. In particular, the
fourth and fifth amendments of the constitution, which
safeguard citizens from unwarranted intrusion by the
government into their private lives, have been virtually
suspended.</p>
<p>The government claims it has a court warrant under Fisa –
but that <b>warrant is from a secret court</b>, shielded
from effective oversight, and with the broadest possible
interpretation. <b>This makes mockery of the rule of law</b>,
let alone of the bill of rights. <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/06/obama-administration-nsa-verizon-records" target="_blank">As
Russell Tice, a former National Security Agency analyst,
put it</a>: "It is a kangaroo court with a rubber stamp."</p>
<p>For the president then to say that there is judicial
oversight is a nonsense – as is the oversight function of
the intelligence committees in Congress. The fact that their
leaders were briefed on this and went along with it, without
question, only shows how broken the system of accountability
is in this country. As the <a href="http://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/63859.James_Madison" target="_blank">founder
James Madison wrote</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>"The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive,
and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few,
or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or
elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of
tyranny."</p>
</blockquote>
<p>When national security is invoked in the <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/usa" title="More
from guardian.co.uk on United States" target="_blank">United States</a>,
that is what we now have. <b>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.</b></p>
<p>The <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/surveillance" title="More from guardian.co.uk on Surveillance" target="_blank">surveillance</a>
revealed by <b>Snowden's disclosures exposes this executive
coup</b>: 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.</p>
<p>I do not say that the United States is a police state. We
have not seen the mass detentions that would complete that
process. But given the extent of this invasion of people's <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/privacy" title="More
from guardian.co.uk on Privacy" target="_blank">privacy</a>, we do have
the electronic and legislative infrastructure of one. If,
for instance, there was now a war that led to a large-scale
anti-war movement – like the one we had against the war in
Vietnam – I fear for our democracy. If the government had
then had the capability that it has now, I do not doubt
there would have been mass detentions. These powers are
extremely dangerous.</p>
<p>In 1975, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_Committee" target="_blank">Senator
Frank Church spoke of the National Security Agency in
these terms</a>: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>"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."</p>
</blockquote>
<p>I would say we have, in fact, fallen into that abyss. <font color="#993300"><big><b>The </b><b><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/nsa" title="More from guardian.co.uk on NSA" target="_blank">NSA</a></b><b>,
</b><b><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/fbi" title="More from guardian.co.uk on FBI" target="_blank">FBI</a></b><b>
and </b><b><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/cia" title="More from guardian.co.uk on CIA" target="_blank">CIA</a></b><b>
have, with the new digital technology, surveillance
powers that the Stasi in the former East Germany could
only have dreamed of. What has been feared and warned
about has come to pass. The so-called intelligence
community has become the United Stasi of America.</b></big></font>
</p>
<p>The question now is whether Senator Church was right or
wrong that crossing the abyss was irreversible. Three days
ago, I would have agreed that effective democracy was now
impossible. But with this brave man Snowden willing to put
his life on the line to get this information out, creating
the possibility that others will join him, I think we can
get back across the abyss.</p>
<p>Whereas <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/bradley-manning" title="More from guardian.co.uk on Bradley Manning" target="_blank">Bradley
Manning</a>'s access was very much more limited, to
field-level information, Snowden's knowledge of his field is
deep and extensive. The material he has released is higher
in classification than what I had with the Pentagon Papers.</p>
<p><big><b>There are reasons for secrecy that have legitimacy,
but what is not legitimate is to use that secrecy to
hide action that is unconstitutional. Neither the
president nor Congress may revoke the fourth amendment –
but that's why what Snowden revealed was secret.</b></big>
His action does not deserve prosecution or punishment;
rather, he deserves our thanks and admiration. "Courage on
the battlefield," said Bismarck, "is a common possession",
but even "respectable people are lacking in civil courage."
Snowden has displayed enormous civil courage.</p>
<p>What I said 40 years ago was that I didn't care what they
said about me; "just read the documents". To protect other
people, I revealed what I had done so that I could say, "I
did this on my own," without the knowledge or help of other
people who might be suspected. We already know that the
Department of Justice has ordered an investigation into the
leak. So Snowden has done the same.</p>
<p>By being out in the open, Snowden could now testify before
Congress under oath – if it calls on him. He could not do
that if he were still anonymous, or if he were in this
country. In 1971, I was on a $50,000 bond for my role in the
release of the Pentagon Papers, but in this climate Snowden
would not be on a bond; he would be in jail – just like Brad
Manning – without bail and incommunicado.</p>
<p>Snowden did what he did because he recognised the NSA's
surveillance programs for what they are: dangerous,
unconstitutional activity. This wholesale invasion of
Americans' and foreign citizens' privacy does not contribute
to our our security; it puts in danger the very liberties
we're trying to protect.</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<br>
<font size="+2"><font face="Calibri"><a href="http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-06-09/nsa-whistleblower-reveals-himself" target="_blank"></a></font></font>
</div>
</div><br></div></div>