Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-VT)
spoke yesterday (9/24), at an
incredible event featuring members of
the Church Committee. WaPo
reported :
A senior U.S. senator on Tuesday called for an end to
the National Security Agency's phone records collection program,
arguing that it treads too heavily on Americans' privacy rights
without having proved its value as a counterterrorism
tool.
Leahy's condemnation of NSA's unconstitutional spying operations is
positive and significant. Members of the Church Committee echoed
Leahy's objections. Former Vice President Walter Mondale expressed
concern that the FISA court is now taking cases that should be in
regular federal court and said that bulk metadata collection was
"upside down" from what the Church Committee intended. Gary Hart
said when FISA was developed they "didn't know about NSA &
other agencies hoovering up all communications." Loch Johnson spoke
eloquently about Congressional culpability in the spy programs,
expressing surprise about how much deference many members of
Congress give to bulk collection. They all called for a renewed
Church Committee-type investigation. I heartily agree. An
aggressive investigation into NSA's domestic spying activities is
sorely needed.
If the panelists had focused on the surveillance issues alone,
there would be little to criticize. Unfortunately, their positive
remarks were tempered by their either slamming or casting aside the
person who made this important debate - and hopefully resulting
legal reforms - possible: the whistleblower Edward Snowden.
Yesterday's the panel discussion would not be possible without
Snowden. His whistleblowing disclosures are the reason for a dozen
surveillance reform bills kicking around Congress, and, with other
NSA whistleblowers, the reason the public knows the U.S. government
has been spying on hundreds of millions of innocent Americans. Yet,
the panelists either erased or condemned the whistleblower that
made this debate possible, a debate that even the President agrees
the public should have.
Leahy said he "did not condone the way these and other
highly-classifeid programs have been disclosed," but in the same
breath condemned the program as useless as a needless invasion of
Americans' privacy.
Mondale noted that the Church Committee specifically avoided
creating an "Official Secrets Act," explained the reform would not
happen without public disclosure, and spoke of the necessity of
"one courageous reporter," conspicuously omitting that journalists
would not have anything to report without whistleblowers like
Snowden.
Johnson expounded on the problem that Congressional oversight is
too responsive to newspaper reports, reports that would not exist
without whistleblowers like Snowden.
As with all whistleblowers, the focus should be on the message
and not the messenger. The focus should be on NSA's lawbreaking,
but to take advantage of the message while disparaging the
messenger is disingenuous at best. If government officials truly
welcome public disclosure and debate about NSA's unlawful
surveillance, then they should welcome the reason we are talking
about NSA: the whistleblower Snowden.
1
1
1
