“Orwellian” FBI Says Citizens Should Have No Secrets That The Government Can’t Access

Submitted by J.D. Heyes via NaturalNews.com,

The police and surveillance state predicted in the forward-looking 1940s classic “1984” by George Orwell, has slowly, but steadily, come to fruition. However, like a frog sitting idly in a pan of steadily-warming water, too many Americans still seem unaware that the slow boil of big government is killing their constitutional liberties.

The latest sign of this stealth takeover of civil rights and freedom was epitomized in recent Senate testimony by FBI Director James Comey, who voiced his objections to civilian use of encryption to protect personal data – information the government has no automatic right to obtain.

As reported by The New American, Comey testified that he believes the government’s spy and law enforcement agencies should have unfettered access to everything Americans may store or send in electronic format: On computer hard drives, in so-called i-clouds, in email and in text messaging – for our own safety and protection. Like many in government today, Comey believes that national security is more important than constitutional privacy protections or, apparently, due process. After all, aren’t criminals the only ones who really have anything to hide?

In testimony before a hearing of the Senate Judiciary Committee entitled “Going Dark: Encryption, Technology, and the Balance Between Public Safety and Privacy” Comey said that in order to stay one step ahead of terrorists, as well as international and domestic criminals, Uncle Sam’s various spy and law enforcement agencies should have access to available technology used to de-encrypt protected data. Also, he believes the government should be the final arbiter deciding when decryption is necessary.

What could go wrong there?

Government, at all levels, is responsible

During the hearing, TNA reported, technology experts warned the panel that giving the FBI limitless access to the personal electronic data of Americans would open it up to exploitation by “bad actors.” But Comey was having none of that.

“It is clear that governments across the world, including those of our closest allies, recognize the serious public safety risks if criminals can plan and undertake illegal acts without fear of detection,” he told the committee.

 

“Are we comfortable with technical design decisions that result in barriers to obtaining evidence of a crime?”

So, in essence, Comey like many before him, especially since the global war on terror was launched – believes that, in the name of national security Americans ought to give up more of their individual and constitutional rights because that’s the only way we can be adequately protected.

Perhaps realizing that his Senate hearing testimony was public, Comey gave the Constitution a passing glance, noting that the government should respect the “requirements and safeguards of the laws” and the country’s founding document. However, as Americans now know, spy agencies during the past two presidential administrations have been tasked increasingly with conducting warrantless, unchecked surveillance of Americans’ electronic data and communications.

But all of this is not on men like Comey and Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama. Congress bears its share of responsibility, too.

This is the way it is – shut up and take it

When such activities of the National Security Agency were exposed in 2013 by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden, many in the media and among the American electorate were quick to blame the agency, as if it was somehow acting out of rogue instinct.

The reality is, however, that the agency is tasked to perform its duties either by statutory law (think the USA Patriot Act) or by presidential directive (think Bush’s order after 9/11 to conduct warrantless surveillance).

“We are not asking to expand the government’s surveillance authority, but rather we are asking to ensure that we can continue to obtain electronic information and evidence pursuant to the legal authority that Congress has provided to us to keep America safe,” Comey said during the Senate hearing.

What does all this mean? It simply means that at every level, government considers its own citizens hostile.

Oh, and there’s nothing we can do about it.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
10 Comments
anarchyst
anarchyst
August 9, 2015 9:41 am

…flood the “system” with “trigger terms”. Millions of people who start out every email message or phone call with these terms can overload the system…

Anonymous
Anonymous
August 9, 2015 10:21 am

Actually, he’s got that backwards.

Government should have no secrets that citizens can’t access.

kokoda
kokoda
August 9, 2015 10:24 am

Absolutely nothing to do with public safety. The elite require every bit of info to protect themselves and their continued lifestyle and subjugation of the masses.

The Stasi and Stalin would drool continuously to have this unfettered power.

Anonymous
Anonymous
August 9, 2015 10:28 am

anarchyst.

Not really.

That NSA super storage center can just collect them all as a database that can easily be searched for your name if it ever wants to mess with you.

It’s like one database recording all calls on your phone -the time and number called but not the conversation itself- and another recording only conversations.

They want to get you they just search for the calls you made on one database and then go to that time and number in the message database to find out what you said.

Either of those databases seem reasonably innocuous to the average person who doesn’t understand how relational databases work and what they can do.

And this is simplistic, there are actually hundreds, maybe thousands, of databases that can be searched in a relational database manner simultaneously.

Donna
Donna
August 9, 2015 10:31 am

Just like Jesus its time (way past) to turn over the tables of the money changers-its over

kokoda
kokoda
August 9, 2015 11:33 am

Anonymous….you are missing the point of anarchyst. We as individuals have no power/influence. Just look at what happens when large protests occur. If 20 million of us did what anarchyst proposes, what could government do – surely they won’t smash our front doors into smithereens and arrest us. There is enormous political power in group action.

Anonymous
Anonymous
August 9, 2015 1:05 pm

kokoda,

They could use it as evidence against you whenever they wanted if you became a nuisance to someone in high places.

Ever notice how any time someone gets prosecuted for a trumped up “terrorist” or “hate” crime charge all their past Facebook, Twitter, and other internet posts get thrown out as evidence against them?

And even if 200,000,000 million did it a hundred times a day it wouldn’t overload them, you have no idea of the processing and data storage power the NSA has nowadays.

kokoda
kokoda
August 9, 2015 2:38 pm

Anonymous….it is Not a matter of overload or the storage capability the NSA. As far as I am concerned the storage is unlimited – so I do know.

I did misread part of the anarchyst comment. He is wrong in terms of overload (I agree with you on that). But, that is not the relevance of 20 or 200 million placing trigger terms in email – they cannot arrest 20 mil, never mind 200 mil. It is a political msg and the NSA becomes powerless. And it destroys their intended purpose for collecting the data, and it has zilch to do with terrorism.

Arab Spring – started in Tunisa, with people communicating on email and mobile phones. That is why our gov’t wants the info, to stop an uprising. Why do you think Obama has the Internet Kill Switch.

Hollow Man
Hollow Man
August 9, 2015 3:38 pm

Even my dong flogging time. I draw the line there

Anonymous
Anonymous
August 9, 2015 3:47 pm

kokoda,

Have you considered the use of all those references by the Division of Precrime in sentencing you?

You could end up serving a life sentence for something that would normally get a fine and probation. (Not fiction, Pennsylvania is already initiating this).