ENEMY OF THE STATE PART TWO: ITS ALL CONNECTED - THE PAST, THE PRESENT, THE FUTURE

Edward Snowden and national security - two subjects that are often found in the same sentence in the present day - certainly affect people of the present day as well as future generations yet to come. Snowden, in fact, may also be connected to the past as well, through ancient writings that apply to and may also be used to criticize what he has done. Take a look at the ripple effect of Snowden's actions - how they affect all kinds of people, and how they even can transcend time. Snowden’s actions undeniably affected the American people. In this digital day and age, how could they not? But how does Snowden – as a person as well as through his actions – measure up to Daniel Ellsberg, a fellow whistle-blower? Daniel Ellsberg was in over his head in regards to the Vietnam War, all the way back in the late 60’s and early 70’s. He had previous military experience, serving in the Marine Corps, and he got even more involved over time, serving in the Pentagon under Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara. In fact, Ellsberg was the one reported the Gulf of Tonkin incident to McNamara – the main event that lead the United States to get involved in the Vietnam War. So what changed in Ellsberg, that lead him to expose the government’s dirty secrets regarding the government’s involvement in Indochina – who was once, according to Encyclopedia Britannica “an ardent early supporter of the U.S. role in Indochina? The question is not what but who changed Ellsberg, and the answer is Randy Kehler, a jail-bound draft resister who gave Ellsberg a more imminent idea of what the Vietnam War’s impact on Americans. Ellsberg said in a reflection upon this pivotal event in his life, …his words in general showed that he was a stellar American, and that he was going to jail as a very deliberate choice—because he thought it was the right thing to do. There was no question in my mind that my government was involved in an unjust war that was going to continue and get larger. Thousands of young men were dying each year. I left the auditorium and found a deserted men's room. I sat on the floor and cried for over an hour, just sobbing. The only time in my life I've reacted to something like that. Ellsberg proceeded to release to The New York Times the Pentagon Papers in attempt to expose to the American public the wrongdoing and excessive involvement in Indochina that the government had tried to keep a secret. How does this man and his brave actions compare to Edward Snowden? In many ways, they don’t. As a person, one may conclude that Ellsberg is the braver, stronger, and perhaps even the wiser and more intelligent of the two. For one, Snowden attempted to join the Special Forces until a broken leg drove him back home, never to return. On the other hand, Ellsberg served as a platoon leader in the Marines. Also, in regards to bravery and authenticity, Snowden seems to lack these qualities, as what he claims are his motives never seem to add up, and the mere fact that he is hiding in Russia this very moment says something profound about his lack of bravery. Contrastingly, Ellsberg did no such thing; he stood his ground and he did not flee, but rather he fought and took it to the courtrooms. Additionally, Ellsberg’s revelations seem to be more impactful than those of Snowden. For example, Ellsberg was dealing with matters of life and death – American troops were dying in thousands in Vietnam. Who, exactly, is the NSA killing, by going through someone’s Gmail account? Also, Ellsberg was revealing secrets on war, which is safe to say somewhat direr a matter than unwarranted spying conducted by the NSA that is trying to ward off terrorist threats. Which whistle-blower revealed the heftier secret? Edward Snowden, who told the public about the NSA’s unjust attacks on freedom in its attempts to protect the people, or Daniel Ellsberg, who told Americans the truth about the Vietnam War that was taking not only peoples’ freedoms but peoples’ lives? Daniel Ellsberg can be connected to Snowden in more ways than one. They do not just share the title of “whistle-blower”, but Ellsberg recently drew another connection between the two of them in an article he wrote for The Guardian in which he discusses the importance of Snowden’s leaks. Ellsberg incriminates the government’s recent actions and deems them as unconstitutional as he says, “Since 9/11, there has been, at first secretly but increasingly openly, a revocation of the bill of rights for which this country fought over 200 years ago. In particular, the fourth and fifth amendments of the US constitution, which safeguard citizens from unwarranted intrusion by the government into their private lives, have been virtually suspended.” Ellsberg continues to describe the terrible state that the government of the United States is in, and how the NSA has taken privacy away from American citizens in a way that rivals what the East German Stasi had done long ago, as he says, “The NSA, FBI and CIA have, with the new digital technology, surveillance powers over our own citizens that the Stasi – the secret police in the former ‘democratic republic’ of East Germany – could scarcely have dreamed of.” He then claims, “Snowden reveals that the so-called intelligence community has become the United Stasi of America.” In this statement, he alleges that Snowden, with his actions, acted as the savior trying to allow the American public to know what their government has become. Is the United States, however, so extreme in its actions that it is comparable to the Stasi? In many ways, yes, it is. But in one major important way, they are so dissimilar that this comparison is illegitimate, and that is in the purpose of the Stasi and the purpose of the NSA. The NSA lives to protect Americans from danger, despite the fact that they cross lines that they perhaps should not cross in the process. On that note, the NSA is also focused on fighting off the terrorist threat at all costs. On the other hand, John Koehler of The New York Times’ book Stasi: The Untold Story of the East German Secret Police serves to explain the purpose of the Stasi which differs vastly with the NSA. In his book, the Stasi, as described by Simon Wiesenthal, a man who spent half of his life hunting down Nazi criminals, “had four decades in which to perfect its machinery of oppression, espionage, and international terrorism and subversion.” Unlike the NSA – actually, in a way completely opposite of the NSA – the Stasi inflicted acts of terrorism on its citizens as well as foreigners that were in no way attempts to protect them but rather to oppress them. Though as Ellsberg noted, there are some commonalities between the NSA and the Stasi, there are key differences between them that make these claims illegitimate. Snowden has others who “believe” – perhaps more legitimately – similar to Snowden. Of course, as with any controversy at the forefront of modern day America, there is also opposition. One of these such men who has something to say against not only Snowden’s alleged ideologies but also all accusers of the NSA is General Michael Hayden, a former Air Force General and the former head of both the National Security Agency and the Central Intelligence Agency. In a recent debate that took place between NSA supporters and NSA opponents, Hayden made a few key points justifying the actions of the NSA that Snowden and his chosen journalists had revealed. For one, Hayden said that the United States is not the only country who spies on its own citizens as well as the citizens of foreign countries and that the only reason that this – which he thinks should be thought of as the norm – has been deemed controversial and questionable by the American public is because of the media. He pins the great stink in America recently that reeks of privacy violations on journalists who try to frame it as a large issue while it is not in the least. He continues to assign blame to the journalists as being the root of the problem, accusing them – the Washington Post in particular – of exaggerating the NSA’s activities and framing them as something they are not. According to Hayden, contrary to what journalists allege, the NSA does not regularly sift through everyone’s private emails, but rather that they only do so when someone gives them reason to do so. On that note, Hayden also said that this method of collecting all emails is much easier than collecting individual emails – these emails, he claims, are read primarily so as to avoid the terrorist threat. He closes his argument, saying that that fateful day back in September of 2001, 9/11 proved that the enemy exists and is could be here, in the United States, at any moment. Thus, the NSA has a responsibility to protect American citizens. These claims seem to focus on calling out journalists as the cause of the problem in the United States as of late while the NSA was acting justly in an attempt to protect their citizens from the evil – namely, the terrorist threat – that is constantly afoot. On the other hand, what does the opposite end of this spectrum of opinions have to say regarding the NSA’s actions? Glenn Greenwald – one of the journalists who Edward Snowden had drawn out to Hong Kong and to whom he leaked the NSA’s documents – lands among the men ultimately on Snowden’s side of things, as he is not happy with the NSA’s actions which he considers to be unconstitutional. Greenwald, in the same debate in which General Hayden had partaken, begins his argument challenging the NSA to prove that they are tracking the enemy – and that as soon as that is proven, journalists will back off. However, until that is proven, he claims that journalists, including himself, will not back down. He later said that the classic excuse that all of this is being done as a result of the constant terrorist threat from which they are trying to protect innocent American citizens is just that – an excuse, and in his opinion, an excuse that has been overused and whittled down into almost meaninglessness. Greenwald also emphasizes time and time again in his argument that unlike the NSA claims over and over again, their online surveillance is not limited or focused while it rather extends past merely persons of interest but to all Americans who reside in the digital world. He deems it to be aggressive and indiscriminant, contrary to the NSA’s claims, an opinion he expressed when he said, “Over and over in the documents of the NSA…is aggressive boasting about the system of indiscriminant, suspicionless [sic] surveillance that they have constructed in the dark where entire populations…who are guilty of nothing have their communications routinely monitored and surveilled [sic] and stored.” There were also a few statistics on the matter that he referenced. For example, Greenwald said that approximately 100 million people are affected by this unwarranted surveillance, asserting that this surpasses the true number of people of interest by far. Likewise, he presents another piece of numerical data, saying that 1.7 billion telephone calls and emails taking place among Americans are documented by the NSA on a daily basis. He also references a recent court decision that ruled this unwarranted surveillance as unconstitutional. Unlike General Hayden, Glenn Greenwald focuses on questioning the NSA’s true intentions as to why they choose to spy on hundreds of millions of Americans – as he claims that they intended not to use state surveillance as a way to zero in on suspicious and possibly threatening persons of interest but rather to encroach upon all Americans’ privacy. Snowden and his actions can be tied to the past as well, as ancient stories serve to condemn Snowden's actions. As the practically proverbial phrase goes, “There are some things better left unsaid.” Are there also things that are better left unknown? This may be the case after taking a closer look at the Edward Snowden ordeal, for it seems as though as a result of this man trying to play God, havoc was wrought upon the United States as well as the rest of the world. In order to see the detrimental effects of omniscience, one must look to the past – all the way back to the ancient stories of Greek mythology. The myth that truly conveys the ill effects of the all-knowing powers often desired by humans is the story of the origin of the Cyclopes and their single eye. In brief, the Cyclopes asked Zeus for the power to see the future in exchange for one of each of their eyes. Zeus carried out the deal as promised, giving the Cyclopes the power to see the future – the only catch was that he only allowed them to see the day in the future on which they die. In turn, the moral of this story was that when a mortal wishes for the knowledge only the immortal should see, when their wish is granted, the future does not make them any more powerful or happy. Rather, they only end up seeing the bad in the future. Another ancient story that manifests the injurious nature of omniscience in the hands of mortals is found in the Holy Bible – the story of Adam and Eve and the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. Adam and Eve, despite God’s warnings against it, ate from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil which exposed them and all generations of man to come to evil and sin – something they would never have known if not for their choice to choose knowledge over obedience to God. The moral of this story, similar to the moral of the story of the Cyclopes, is that humans do not benefit from omniscience and that the only one who truly needs all-knowing powers is God. How then are Snowden’s actions any different from those of the Cyclopes and Adam and Eve? He says that he wants all data and information to be free to the public rather than having only government officials exposed to it, similar to how the Cyclopes and Adam and Eve wanted the knowledge only the deities had access to in each story. He let this desire for all people to have knowledge of the NSA’s doings control his actions as he proceeded to leak the information to the world, just as the Cyclopes made a deal with Zeus to have the power to see into the future in exchange for one of their eyes and as Adam and Eve chose to eat the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil so that they could know as much as God. The fallouts in all three stories also run parallel to one another. With Edward Snowden, the information that went from merely the hands of the NSA to all people put the United States citizens at risk for danger that the NSA was once able to prevent while the United States’ relationships with other countries were also damaged. With the Cyclopes, their exposure to knowledge only meant for the gods was similarly detrimental in that they only saw the day and way in which they were to die. With Adam and Eve, their eating of the tree exposed them to the evil of sin. In other words, in all three situations, those who desired omniscience became no freer or happier from it, and their accounts served to reveal that omniscience is not something meant for everyone to possess. Instead, those in positions of power – the government or Zeus or God – are the only ones meant to be exposed to such knowledge. As French poet Alphonse de Lamartine says in his poem “L’Homme”, “Our crime is to be a man and want to know…” Snowden and his actions, thus, are an example of the harmful effects of desiring and striving for omniscience – and that was what was truly wrong with what he did.