Schneier on Security

Bad Boy Binney • March 29, 2016 9:24 AM

Very telling and accurate preface – can you imagine Killary or Chump uttering these truths?:

I assumed major responsibilities for protecting the privacy of individual American citizens. Like many conscientious readers of newspapers and magazines, I had become alarmed about the undeniable and frightening proliferation of technological means
to invade a person’s privacy, but now I had the duty to act affirmatively. In commissioning a study of surveillance technology, I reasoned as follows: If knowledge is power, then certainly the secret and unlimited acquisition of the most detailed knowledge
about the most intimate aspects of a person’s thoughts and actions conveys extraordinary power over that person’s life and reputation to the snooper who possesses the highly personal information. And by vastly expanding the range and power of the snooper’s eyes, ears and brains, the new technology facilitates and magnifies the acquisition and use of such information. Moreover, as long as surveillance technology remains unregulated and continues to grow at an accelerating rate, the free and enriching exercise of the rights guaranteed by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights will inevitably be chilled to the point of immobility by the general awareness that Big Brother commands the tools of omniscience.

Of course the powerful elite have known this too well, hence why they aggressively pursue their course under the banner of “The War on Terrorism”. Indeed Binney, Chomsky, Snowden and others point out that the trove of government documents that have come to light over recent decades and following the NSA leaks evidence the spying apparatus is far more focused upon economic matters e.g. gaining advantages in trade and economic forums, scapegoating and targeting of domestic enemies (the outspoken), political espionage, infiltrating movements they don’t like (social, environmental, political etc.). Thus, it can be reasonably inferred that the domestic population is seen as enemy #1 – if they get too uppity, they pose threats to the status quo and must be crushed.

As the Cato Institute notes:

In his 2004 book Perilous Times, Geoffrey R. Stone observes that with respect to free speech rights in wartime, “Time and again, Americans have suppressed dissent, imprisoned and deported dissenters, and then—later—regretted their actions.” …it is not simply American’s free speech rights that are often threatened by federal agencies. The federal government’s penchant for surveilling, penetrating, and actively subverting domestic political activities by individuals and groups spans periods of peace and war over more than a century. Whether protesting the march to war, federal policy on AIDS research, civil rights violations, or simply enjoying the Nevada desert at a “Burning Man” gathering, the common theme that emerges is that simply publicly expressing strong political views that run counter to the prevailing government political paradigm is often enough to trigger federal government surveillance.

…

Too often, federal domestic surveillance of citizens was a prelude to government actions aimed at subverting civil society organizations opposed to American involvement in foreign wars, aiding conscientious objectors, advancing civil rights and political autonomy for people of color, the creation of labor unions, and even surveillance of candidates running for or holding office–including members of Congress and presidential contenders… in many of these cases, federal surveillance and political repression were directed most forcefully at individuals and organizations that challenged the prevailing political paradigm on the issue at hand. Occasionally, the domestic surveillance was aimed squarely at the political opponents of the president then occupying the White House (FDR ordering surveillance against isolationists, LBJ ordering Goldwater’s campaign plane bugged). In other cases, simply the perception by federal officials that an individual or group might be a “threat to national security” (think Japanese-Americans in World War II or Arab/Muslim-Americans today) was enough to trigger an unwarranted federal attack on the target’s constitutional rights.

The individuals and organizations subjected to these tactics often found themselves either politically crushed or so badly damaged as to be rendered politically marginalized and ineffective. The personal and professional costs of these federal attacks on the
constitutional rights of these citizens were usually life-long, and belated apologies by federal officials decades removed from the actions of their predecessors did little if anything to actually right the original wrong, much less preclude a repeat of such
surveillance and repression against others.

But, but ‘Terrorism’?!?! I don’t think so. As Binney notes, this is all about control, power and money:

So why do they keep doing it?

Money. It takes a lot of money, you have to build up Bluffdale [the location of the NSA’s data storage center, in Utah] to store all the data. If you collect all the data, you’ve got to store it, you have to hire more people to analyze it, you have to hire more contractors, managers to manage the flow. You have to start a big data initiative. It’s an empire. Look at what they’ve built! Have you ever looked around all the buildings they’ve built up because of 9/11?

So that’s what it’s all about, expanding the budget for the intelligence community?

If you have a problem, you need money to solve it. But if you solve that problem, you no longer have the justification to get money. That’s the way they view it – keep the problem going, so the money keeps flowing. Once you build up this big empire, you have to sustain it.
…
Look at the influence and power the intelligence community has over the government. They [the government] are giving them everything they want, they’re trying to cover up all their tracks and their crimes. Look at the influence and power they’re gaining.

NSA – The U.S. shadow government agency that touts the mission to save our freedoms and way of life by destroying our freedoms and way of life.