Reading the ruling (.PDF here) independent of what is being reported about it is most interesting.....If you like reading the arcane or call it esoteric court report finding.
Arcane: Known or understood by only a few: arcane economic theories. See Synonyms at mysterious.
Esoteric: intended for or likely to be understood by only a small number of people with a specialized knowledge or interest.
Legal language as a highly structured form of Natural Language is about as close to the highly structured Artificial Language of Programming as Natural Language could be without actually, technically being called a program language. Someday it will evolve to a programming language. That time will come when it crosses the bridge created by the abstraction of rights I examined in a prior post:
"Block chain triple entry bookeeping for every thing in the world that has some property right associated with it. Public property or private property. Social concept or real thing.
Stakeholder is a social concept that has both public and private aspects. The real conflict we have in the world is failure to structurally organize our public and private stakeholding property rights and the values of those rights. Separate the two conceptually and they get easier to understand and manage."
The court finding is logic expressed in language to create structure. That is a recurring fundamental idea I have expressed in many prior blog entries. The court finding is written in English. Tedious reading but it was not meant to be entertaining as well as informative for public consumption that loses much in translation to a higher level language of the vernacular with a consequent introduction of noise and bias.
It is the court finding that is the most rigorous rock of logic legal examination and precise English language expression finding that puts the NSA between a rock of logic and a hard place.
Logic --- Legal Language ----Hard place structure. The language of the court tells how the NSA is between the rack and hard place and court decision is that NSA loses.
NSA violated privacy rights. Rights are not absolute. If there was enough reason to violate the constitutional right to privacy then it is permissable, legal to do so. There exists a special need to do so. Judge Richard Leon ruled there was no special need to do what NSA had been doing. NSA said Terrorists, writ big and often.
If Terrorist and if existing info collection system, a fact, then prove efficacy by result.
There is no result
The efficacy prong! The prong that hoists the NSA on its own petard. I have use expression but never examined its origin described by Wikipedia here.
Petardiers were used during sieges of castles or fortified cities. The petard, a rather primitive and exceedingly dangerous explosive device, consisted of a brass or iron bell-shaped device filled with gunpowder fixed to a wooden base called a madrier. This was attached to a wall or gate using hooks and rings, the fuse lit and, if successful, the resulting explosive force, concentrated at the target point, would blow a hole in the obstruction, allowing assault troops to enter.
The word remains in modern usage in the phrase hoist with one's own petard, which means "to be harmed by one's own plan to harm someone else" or "to fall into one's own trap," implying that one could be lifted up (hoist, or blown upward) by one's own bomb.
If the NSA could show a preponderance of reasonable benefit from its collection of information on citizens then it might be a permissible reason to outweigh the right to privacy.
The NSA would have to show that it did in fact catch a lot of terrorists. It can't. However if the NSA could show that it caught a lot of really bad people that are also US Citizens but harming our country greviously by their actions, then presto: Good reason for surveillance. That of course is police work. Not war on a non-state actor.
The only way out of the rock and hard place that NSA finds itself in necessary to continue its institutional existence is to justify its existence by finding criminals other than terrorists and turning the focus of public opinion for their capture and prosecution on them.
Banksters? I wish.
War on drugs? That war is declining.
Who is really harming the USA as much as the hyped up threat of Terrorists?
Mass murderers?
The situation is much like the DOD found itself after the Cold War was over. It had to find a new enemy. One that was a real threat that we absolutely must protect ourself against.
Find one or create one. Finding or Creating one has to be based on a great real death and destruction attack. Round up the usual suspects for selection.
All that resource at NSA an nowhere to go.
MHOP is not an option. They have been Snowdend once severely. Twice shy. There are to many Snowdens out there. To much dispersed network information and knowledge that cannot be protected. Cryptology might be secure and unbreakable but human beings are not.
If the NSA cannot find or create enemies to justify its existence then how about a paradigm shift of beating swords into plow shares and using its vast information big data and big data mining ability. Turn its mission into one aimed at the greater social good of out country.
Information is the new medium of exchange. Perhaps the NSA should be the new quasi governmental entity of information like the Federal Reserve was created to handle the nation's monetary system a hundred years ago.
The new crypto money itself is just data information that requires an extreme degree of security and trust.
NSA is a big player in the crypto world and the greatest threat to our security is the loss of the US Dollar as the world reserve currency.
A new mission for the NSA.....Duh! It is the only way for us to maintain our financial leadership of the free world. Or has that already been taken over by world wide Corporatocracy?
Corporatocracy: That other non-state actor that is a threat to society. On the other hand it is where all the money is.
Rock and a Hard Place.
World wide financial collapse and loss of world dominance is the greatest threat we face.
Disaster has always resulted in greater centralized authoritarian control. No good disaster goes unused to get it.
The Shock Doctirne
Couple financial disaster with loss of world wide communication and there is a double whammy.. Start the disaster with cutting communication, which means cutting all financial transactions as well as fun on Facebook and Netflix movies. It only has to happen for a short time.
Who has their finger on the internet kill switch?
This prior blog looks at that.
Destroy a village in order to save it? While the origin of the phrase and who said what is controversial, the meaning is not. Save it for what and whom? Cui Bono?
No comments:
Post a Comment