NSA Data Mining: Good or Evil?

Data mining was thrown into the spotlight by Edward Snowdon when he disclosed it to the American public.  As with any new and important subject matter, the media has been struggling to get it's arms around it.  Let me see if I can help.

Is Snowdon merely a whistleblower (he disclosed a government project, but, unlike the Wikileaks gang, disclosed no details)?  Hardly.  The project he disclosed was classified and highly confidential.

But, does confidential mean important?  In this case, it clearly was.  Casting a net for gathering information as wide as what the U.S. government was able to do required an enormous investment in time, people and money. In addition, it relied on remarkable computing technology.  We can well imagine the extent to which China, Russia and other totalitarian governments would love to copy it, and, now, no doubt will.

The history of weaponry goes back a long way.  From sling shot, to cannon, to atomic bombs -- data mining is simply a part of the progression.  Culling data on the scale the U.S. has been doing is simply one more tool of war.  As with most weapons, it can be used either offensively or defensively.  So how do we deal with it?

The atom bomb provides a useful model for discussing this new informational weapon.  Nazi scientists were the first to give serious thought to an atomic bomb.  Fortunately, it slipped through their fingers when, towards the end of WW II, they were unable to marshal all the necessary supplies and resources needed for this project.  (Driving out leading Jewish scientists didn't help them much either.)

But, could America be trusted to be the sole possessor of such technology?  Julius and Ethyl Rosenberg thought not.    For them, Russia, then under Stalin, was a better kind of government.  I believe most historians today would disagree.  But, what about America as the sole possessor of such a powerful weapon?  Who knows?  But what we do know is that through their spies Russia knew America had the bomb and were quite comfortable with us using it on Japan.

Once again:  Is Edward Snowdon a whistleblower or a spy?  Here is where the media must get it's facts straight.  Thomas Andrews Drake was a true whistleblower.  He was appalled by the wastefulness of our government in the pursuit of new technologies.  He reached out to all the appropriate people.  And, in the end was hounded by our government for doing what any right-thinking American would do -- provided they also had nerves of steel.  (Going up against the government is not anything for the weak of heart.)

Today, you'll hear some U.S. representatives and senators complain they knew nothing about America's data mining of phone calls and internet activity.  But, they clearly know, or should know,  that it doesn't work that way.  Special congressional committees are set up specifically to review this kind of information.  Others in congress now say they should have known of it too.  Nonsense.  The American public has on a number occasion voted into office some pretty questionable people.  A special committee is therefore exactly the right way to go.

But, can the government be trusted to collect such information?  Good question.  I'd normally say yes.  But recent disclosures regarding the behavior of people within the IRS toward groups that speak against the administration suggest that this question not all that cut and dried.  The president's lenient attitude toward those in the IRS most closely associated with the agency's questionable behavior is especially troubling.  Obama must learn that like Caesar's wife, you not only have to be pure, you have to look pure.

Oh, and lest I forget the greatest irony of all:  Where does Edward Snowdon hightail it to?  Why, of course, to Hong Kong, a territory under the political domination of China -- that great citadel of human rights and free speech.  Give me a break.   Does Edward Snowdon, and his buddies who find him to be a noble soldier in the battle for transparency and human rights, have no shame?