|
Americans typically think that of part of their right to privacy is the government not being able to obtain their private communications without justification. That's not the way the government has seen it at least since I qualified as a bona fide US intelligence operative* in military service a quarter century ago. The government makes a distinction between information (raw data) and intelligence (data processed into a useful form). Government does not consider the gathering and accumulation of information to be a violation of the right to privacy because the data accumulation is not yet in the useful form of an intelligence collection that can be used to the detriment of citizens. An intelligence collection without proper authorization has been what constituted violation of privacy rights.
It's the citizens' responsibility to either exchange their private information in a way that can't be accessed by the government; or, via a third party willing render it unsalvageable. It is the government's responsibility to secure its caches of information from misuse. The first level of protection was classifying the information. That way most people wouldn't even know there's something to look for let alone try to exploit. That first level of security is gone.
I don't object to the premise of caching bulk information that can be sifted through later, under a well defined warrant, and processed into intelligence in the pursuit of national security. I don't object to continuing the practice since I know there are remaining levels of security progressively more difficult to breach. I do object to any unauthorized individual deciding for everyone else that subverting a security measure implemented to protect them is what's best for them. The Bradley Manning treatment would be appropriate.
*A condition of which is that federal law restricts my information gathering activities on US citizens for the rest of my life, not just for while I was in federal service.
|