Citizen Action Monitor

If the people do nothing to stop government surveillance we are headed for “turnkey tyranny” – Ed Snowden

“Even if you’re not doing anything wrong you’re being watched and recorded”

No 774 Posted by fw, June 10, 2013

“The greatest fear that I have regarding the outcome for America of these disclosures is that nothing will change. People will see in the media all of these disclosures. They’ll know the length that the government is going to to grant themselves powers unilaterally to create greater control over American society and global society, but they won’t be willing to take the risks necessary to stand up and fight to change things, to force their representatives to actually take a stand in their interests.”Edward Snowden

The Guardian’s Glenn Greenwald talks to Edward Snowden, the source behind the NSA files about his motives for the biggest intelligence leak in a generation.

Watch the embedded 12:35-minute video below followed by a full transcript of the interview.

NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden: ‘I don’t want to live in a society that does these sort of things’, The Real News Network, June 9, 2013

TRANSCRIPT

Snowden – My name’s Ed Snowden. I’m 29 years old. I work for Booz, Allen, Hamilton as an Infrastructure Analyst for NSA in Hawaii.

Greenwald – What are some of the positions that you held previously within the intelligence community?

Snowden I’ve been a systems engineer, a systems administrator, senior adviser for the Central Intelligence Agency, solutions consultant, and a telecommunications information systems officer.

Greenwald – One of the things people are going to be most interested in in trying to understand who you are and what you’re thinking is there came some point in time when you crossed this line of thinking about being a whistleblower to making the choice to actually become a whistleblower, walk people through that decision-making process.

Snowden When you’re in positions of privileged access, like a systems administrator for these sort of telecommunications agencies, you’re exposed to a lot more information on a broader scale than the average employee. And because of that you see things that may be disturbing. But over the course of a normal person’s career you’d only see one or two of these instances. When you see everything you see them on a more frequent basis, and you recognize that some of these things are actually abuses. And when you talk to people about them in a place like this where this is the normal state of business, people tend not to take them very seriously and, you know, move on from them. But over time that awareness of wrongdoing sort of builds up and you feel compelled to talk about it. And the more you talk about it the more you’re ignored, the more you’re told it’s not a problem until eventually you realize that these things need to be determined by the public, not by somebody who is simply hired by the government.

Greenwald – Talk a little bit about how the American surveillance state actually functions. Does it target the actions of Americans?

Snowden – NSA and the intelligence community in general is focused on getting intelligence wherever it can by any means possible. It believes on the grounds of a sort of self-certification that they serve the national interest. Originally we saw that focus as very narrowly tailored as foreign intelligence gathered overseas. Now increasingly we see that it’s happening domestically. And to do that the NSA specifically targets the communications of everyone. It ingests them by default. It collects them in its system and it filters them and it analyzes them and it measures them and it stores them for periods of time simply because that the easiest and most efficient and most valuable way to achieve these ends. So while they may be intending to target someone associated with a foreign government or someone they suspect of terrorism, they’re collecting your communications to do so. Any analyst at any time can target anyone — any selector anywhere. Where those communications will be picked up depends on the range of the sensor networks and the authorities that that analyst is empowered with. Not all analysts have the ability to target everything. But I, sitting at my desk, certainly had the authorities to wiretap anyone from you or your accountant to a federal judge to even the president if I had a personal email.

Greenwald – One of the extraordinary parts about this episode is that usually whistleblowers do what they do anonymously and take steps to remain anonymous for as long as they can, which they hope often is forever. You on the other hand have this attitude to do the opposite, which is to declare yourself openly as the person behind these disclosures. Why did you choose to do that?

SnowdenI think that the public is owed an explanation of the motivations behind the people who make these disclosures that are outside of the democratic model. When you are subverting the power of government, that’s a fundamentally dangerous thing to democracy. And if you do that in secret consistently, you know, as the government does when it wants to benefit from a secret action that it took, it’ll kind of give its officials a mandate to go — hey, you know, tell the press about this thing and that thing so the public is on our side. But they rarely if ever do that when an abuse occurs. That falls to individual citizens, but they’re typically maligned. It becomes a thing of — these people are against the country, they’re against the government. But I’m not. I’m no different from anybody else. I don’t have special skills. I’m just another guy who sits there day to day in the office watching what’s happening and goes – this is something that’s not our place to decide. The public needs to decide whether these programs are right or wrong. And I’m willing to go on the record to defend the authenticity of them and say I didn’t change these. I didn’t modify the story. This is the truth. This is what’s happening. You should decide whether we need to be doing this.

Greenwald – Have you given thought to what it is the U.S. government’s response to your conduct is in terms of what they might say about you, how they might try to depict you, what they might try to do to you?

Snowden – Yeah. I could be, you know, rendered by the CIA. I could have people come after me or any of their third-party partners — you know, they work closely with a number of other nations. Or, you know, they could pay off the triads or, you know, any — any of their agents or assets. We’ve got a CIA station just up the road, and the consulate here in Hong Kong. I’m sure they’re going to be very busy for the next week. And that’s a fear I’ll live under for the rest of my life however long that happens to be. You can’t come forward against the world’s most powerful intelligence agencies and be completely free from risk because they’re such powerful adversaries that no one can meaningfully oppose them. If they want to get you, they’ll get you in time. But at the same time you have to make a determination about what it is that’s important to you. And if living unfreely but comfortably is something you’re willing to accept – and I think many of us are, it’s the human nature – you can get up every day, you can go to work, you can collect your large paycheck for relatively little work, against the public interest and go to sleep at night after watching your shows. But if you realize that’s the world that you helped create, and it’s going to get worse the next generation and the next generation, to extend the capabilities of this sort of architecture of repression, you realize that might be willing to accept any risk, and it doesn’t matter what the outcome is so long as the public gets to make their own decisions about how that’s applied.

Greenwald – Why should people care about surveillance?

SnowdenBecause even if you’re not doing anything wrong you’re being watched and recorded. And the storage capability of these systems increases every year consistently by orders of magnitude to where it’s getting to the point where you don’t have to have done anything wrong, you simply have to eventually fall under suspicion from somebody, even by a wrong call and then they can use this system to go back in time and scrutinize very decision you’ve ever made, every friend you’ve ever discussed something with and attack you on that basis to sort of derive suspicion from a sort of innocent life and paint anyone in the context of a wrongdoer.

Greenwald – We are currently sitting in a room in Hong Kong which is where we are because you travelled here – talk a little bit about why it is that you came here and specifically there are going to be people who will speculate that what you really intend to do is defect to the country that many see as the number one rival of the United States, which is China. And that what you’re really doing is essentially is to aid an enemy of the United States with which you intend to seek asylum. Can you talk a little bit about that?

Snowden – Sure. So there’s a couple of assertions in those arguments that are sort of embedded in the questioning of the choice of Hong Kong. The first is that China is an enemy of the United States. It’s not. I mean there are conflicts between the United States’ government and the Chinese PRC government, but the people inherently, you know, we don’t care. We trade with each other freely. You know, we’re not at war. We’re not in armed conflict and we’re not trying to be. We’re the largest trading partners out there for each other. Additionally, Hong Kong has a strong tradition of free speech. People think — China, oh great firewall. Mainland China does have significant restrictions on free speech, but the people of Hong Kong have a long tradition of protesting in the streets, of making their views known. The Internet is not filtered here, no more so than any Western government. And I believe that the Hong Kong government is actually independent in relation to a lot of other leading Western governments.

Greenwald – If your motive had been to harm the United States and help its enemies, or if your motive had been personal material gain, were there thing that you could have done with these documents to advance those goals that you didn’t end up doing?

Snowden – Absolutely. I mean anybody in the positions of access with the technical capabilities that I had could, you know, suck out secrets, pass them on the open market to Russia, you know they always have an open door as we do. I had access to, you know, the full rosters of everyone working at the NSA, the entire intelligence community, and uncover assets all around the world, the locations of every station, what their missions are and so forth. If I had just wanted to harm the U.S. then you could shut down the surveillance system in an afternoon. But that’s not my intention. I think for anyone making that argument they need to think if they were in my position – and, you know, you live a privileged life, you’re living in Hawaii, in paradise and making a ton of money – what would it take to make you leave everything behind?

The greatest fear that I have regarding the outcome for America of these disclosures is that nothing will change. People will see in the media all of these disclosures. They’ll know the length that the government is going to to grant themselves powers unilaterally to create greater control over American society and global society, but they won’t be willing to take the risks necessary to stand up and fight to change things, to force their representatives to actually take a stand in their interests. And the months ahead, the years ahead, it’s only going to get worse until eventually there will be a time where policies will change. Because the only things that restricts the activities of the surveillance state are policy. Even our agreements with other sovereign governments, we consider that to be a stipulation of policy rather than a stipulation of law. And because of that a new leader will be elected, they’ll flip the switch, say that because of the crisis, because of the dangers that we face in the world, you know, some new and unpredicted threat, we need more authority, we need more power. And there will be nothing the people can do at that point to oppose it. And it will be turnkey tyranny.

SEE ALSO

  • Glenn Greenwald on How NSA Leaker Edward Snowden Helped Expose a “Massive Surveillance Apparatus” Democracy Now, June 10, 2013 — Guardian columnist Glenn Greenwald joins us to discuss Snowden’s actions and the multiple disclosures he’s revealed about government surveillance. …”It’s one thing to say that we want the U.S. government to have these capabilities. It’s another thing to allow this to be assembled without any public knowledge, without any public debate, and with no real accountability. What ultimately drove [Snowden] forward…is the need for a light to be shined on what this incredibly consequential [surveillance] world is all about and the impact it’s having both on our country and our planet.”
  • Chris Hedge’s bleak picture of America, exhorts citizens to “Rise Up or Die” Posted May 23, 2013 — “It is time to build radical mass movements that defy all formal centers of power and make concessions to none. It is time to employ the harsh language of open rebellion and class warfare. It is time to march to the beat of our own drum. The law historically has been a very imperfect tool for justice, as African-Americans know, but now it is exclusively the handmaiden of our corporate oppressors; now it is a mechanism of injustice. It was our corporate overlords who launched this war. Not us. Revolt will see us branded as criminals. Revolt will push us into the shadows. And yet, if we do not revolt we can no longer use the word ‘hope.’”
FAIR USE NOTICE: This blog, Citizen Action Monitor, may contain copyrighted material that may not have been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. I claim no ownership of such materials. Such material, published without profit, is made available for educational purposes, to advance understanding of human rights, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues. It is published in accordance with the provisions of the 2004 Supreme Court of Canada ruling and its six principle criteria for evaluating fair dealing.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: