Surveillance is Security: Big Brother unleashes the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act

big brother

© unknown



Nothing you write, say, text, tweet or share via phone or computer is private anymore.

This is the new normal in America today.


A process which started shortly after 9/11 has grown into a full-fledged campaign of warrantless surveillance, electronic tracking and data mining, carried out by federal agents who have been given access to the vast majority of electronic communications in America. Their methods completely undermine constitution safeguards, and yet no federal agency, president, court or legislature has stepped up to halt this assault on our rights.


In fact, Congress, the courts, and the president (starting with George W. Bush and expanding exponentially under Barack Obama) have actively helped to erect this electronic concentration camp in which we are now imprisoned.


A good case in point is the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act (CISA), formerly known as CISPA (Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act). Sold to the public as necessary for protecting us against cyber attacks or internet threats such as hacking, this Orwellian exercise in tyranny-masquerading-as-security actually makes it easier for the government to spy on Americans, while officially turning Big Business into a government snitch.


Be warned: this cybersecurity bill is little more than a wolf in sheep's clothing or, as longtime critic Senator Ron Wyden labeled it, "a surveillance bill by another name."


Lacking any significant privacy protections, CISA, which sacrifices privacy without improving security, will do for surveillance what the Patriot Act did for the government's police powers: it will expand, authorize and normalize the government's intrusions into the most intimate aspects of our lives to such an extent that there will be no turning back. In other words, it will ensure that the Fourth Amendment, which protects us against unfounded, warrantless government surveillance, does not apply to the Internet or digital/electronic communications of any kind.


In a nutshell, CISA would make it legal for the government to spy on the citizenry without their knowledge and without a warrant under the guise of fighting cyberterrorism. It would also protect private companies from being sued for sharing your information with the government, namely the National Security Agency (NSA) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), in order to prevent "terrorism" or an "imminent threat of death or serious bodily harm."


Law enforcement agencies would also be given broad authority to sift through one's data for any possible crimes. What this means is that you don't even have to be suspected of a crime to be under surveillance. The bar is set so low as to allow government officials to embark on a fishing expedition into your personal affairs—emails, phone calls, text messages, purchases, banking transactions, etc.—based only on their need to find and fight "crime."


Take this anything-goes attitude towards government surveillance, combine it with Big Business' complicity over the government's blatantly illegal acts, the ongoing trend towards overcriminalization, in which minor acts are treated as major crimes, and the rise of private prisons, which have created a profit motive for jailing Americans, and you have all the makings of a fascist police state.


So who can we count on to protect us from the threat of government surveillance?


It won't be the courts. Not in an age of secret courts, secret court rulings, and an overall deference by the courts to anything the government claims is necessary to its fight against terrorism.


It won't be Congress, either (CISA is their handiwork, remember), which has failed to do anything to protect the citizenry from an overbearing police state, all the while enabling the government to continue its power grabs. It was Congress that started us down this whole Big Brother road with its passage and subsequent renewals of the USA Patriot Act, which drove a stake through the heart of the Bill of Rights.


And it certainly won't be the president. Indeed, President Obama recently issued an executive order calling on private companies (phone companies, banks, Internet providers, you name it) to share their customer data ( personal data) with each other and, most importantly, the government. Here's the problem, however: while Obama calls for vague protections for privacy and civil liberties without providing any specific recommendations, he appoints the DHS to oversee the information sharing and develop guidelines with the attorney general for how the government will collect and share the data.


Talk about putting the wolf in charge of the hen house.


Mind you, this is the same agency that is responsible for militarizing the police, weaponizing SWAT teams, spying on activists, stockpiling ammunition, distributing license plate readers to state police, carrying out military drills in American cities, establishing widespread surveillance networks through the use of fusion centers, funding city-wide surveillance systems, accelerating the domestic use of drones, and generally establishing itself as the nation's standing army, i.e., a national police force .


This brings me back to the knotty problem of how to protect Americans from cyber attacks without further eroding our privacy rights. As I point out in my book there are three camps of where to draw the line.


In the first camp are those who trust the government to do the right thing. To this group, CISA is simply a desperately needed blueprint for safeguarding us against a possible cyberattack. The problem is that CISA is a "privacy nightmare" that "stomps all over civil liberties" without making "the country any safer against cyberattacks."


In the second camp are those who not only don't trust the government but think the government is out to get them. Sadly, they've got good reason to distrust the government, especially when it comes to abusing its powers and violating our rights. To those in this second group, surveillance is here to stay, which means the government will continue to monitor, regulate and control all means of communications.


Then there's the third camp, which neither sees government as an angel or a devil, but merely as an entity that needs to be controlled and bound "down from mischief with the chains of the Constitution." To these few, the only way to ensure balance in government is by holding government officials accountable to abiding by the rule of law.


Unfortunately, with all branches of the government stridently working to maintain its acquired powers, and the private sector marching in lockstep, there seems to be little to protect the American people from the fast-growing electronic surveillance state. In the meantime, surveillance has become the new normal, and the effects of this endless surveillance are resulting in a more anxious and submissive citizenry.


Categories: