• Twitter
  • Facebook
News-Sentinel.com Your Town. Your Voice.
Opening Arguments

No one is excluded

I don't want to fuel anybody's paranoid fantasies, but welcome to the surveillance state:

RT: In light of the Petraeus/Allen scandal while the public is so focused on the details of their family drama, one may argue that the real scandal in this whole story is the power, the reach of the surveillance state. I mean if we take General Allen – thousands of his personal e-mails have been sifted through private correspondence. It’s not like any of those men was planning an attack on America. Does the scandal prove the notion that there is no such thing as privacy in a surveillance state?

William Binney: Yes, that’s what I’ve been basically saying for quite some time, is that the FBI has access to the data collected, which is basically the emails of virtually everybody in the country. And the FBI has access to it. All the congressional members are on the surveillance too, no one is excluded. They are all included. So, yes, this can happen to anyone. If they become a target for whatever reason – they are targeted by the government, the government can go in, or the FBI, or other agencies of the government, they can go into their database, pull all that data collected on them over the years, and we analyze it all. So, we have to actively analyze everything they’ve done for the last 10 years at least.

A strong reason to resist mightily all the breeches of privacy we know about is to discourage, however slightly, all the ones we don't know about. And when in doubt, it's always safe to assume you're being snooped on. Getting stuff on us makes the job much easier for those in authority, so why wouldn't they do whatever they think they can get away with?