On March 10th at the SXSW arts and culture festival, whistleblower and former National Security Association (NSA) contractor Edward Snowden gave a live video presentation from Russia regarding the NSA, privacy and government electronic surveillance, according to The San Francisco Gate.
During his presentation Snowden stated that the NSA’s mass surveillance of U.S. citizens causes agents to overlook legitimate suspects because they are overly occupied surveying everyone in bulk, according to The Washington Post. So while the NSA definately surveys everyone in large quantity, the quality of the surveillance was sub par.
Snowden blames this ineffective method for being responsible for the Boston Marathon Bombing in 2013 and for the attempted attack on a jetliner on Christmas 2009.
Snowden says mass electronic surveillance methods are implemented by the NSA to gather data in the name of “national security.”
These methods include the recording of private phone calls, hacking private emails, collecting data illicitly among other things, according to The Telegraph.
What makes this so controversial amongst the people is whether this is a violation of the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which states that there shall be no search and/or seizurewithout a warrant obtained through due process.
“We’ve actually had a tremendous intelligence failure because … we’re monitoring everybody’s communications instead of suspects’ communications,” Snowden stated during his presentation. This has “caused us to miss” intelligence that could be potentially vital for security.
Snowden’s claims are backed by a recent report conducted by the New America Foundation in January of 2014.
The report is based upon an analysis of 225 cases of individuals recruited by terrorist groups and charged by the U.S. with terrorism since 2001. It details that while the NSA’s electronic surveillance did contribute to gathering legitimate intelligence, the intelligence gathered through this method was minimal and only instigated 1.8 percent of total investigations.
Rather, the strategies that contributed most to gathering intelligence and initiating investigations were more traditional methods of espionage, such as leads from informants, tips from local communities and targeted intelligence operations.
With this information in mind, I am rethinking whether the questionable behavior of the NSA and the U.S. government is really worth the compromise of civil liberties.
If such surveillance is so impractical compared with methods that do not violate civil liberties to the same extent as the mass surveillance, then why bother continuing to use it?
I feel that to continue to use such methods only creates more insecurity as it risks U.S. security officials missing important factors that could potentially save lives.
If there are other options available that are shown to be more effective than the mass surveillance, then they should be given priority over the mass surveillance the NSA implements.
