The Dangerous Opacity of the NSA

Published in Le Temps
(Switzerland) on 25 July 2013
by Stéphane Bussard (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Taylor S. Hammer. Edited by .

Edited by Laurence Bouvard

The idealistic American President Woodrow Wilson, who was deeply committed to the establishment of the League of Nations in Geneva, did not object to the idea of illegally collecting information from Western Union telegrams. This was in 1920. A little less than a century later, the entire world was scandalized by whistle-blower Edward Snowden’s revelations which bring to light the far-reaching practices of the National Security Agency, an American intelligence organization.

With the exception of the two decades immediately following the adoption of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act in 1978, America has regularly put its citizens under surveillance. Illegally. The attacks of Sept. 11, 2001 nonetheless mark a new era. The politicians in power have given the NSA a level of firepower that earlier agencies never had. The Europeans targeted by the NSA were rightly offended by it, even if it is not certain that their practices are that different.

The George W. Bush and Barack Obama administrations have seen an exponential growth in surveillance activities. They are convinced that these policies, reminiscent of Orwell’s thought police, have allowed them to avoid any major attack since 2001, with the exception of the Boston terrorist bombing.

One fact is particularly troubling: A secret document made public by Edward Snowden, according to The New York Review of Books, reveals that the judicial court that is supposed to give its approval to any surveillance activity had accused the NSA of violating the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution and going against the court ruling. This example shows that the system of checks and balances, as far as the fight against terrorism is concerned, is either not functioning or is functioning poorly. In 2004, George W. Bush lied when he declared publicly that any wiretapping was approved by the court. In 2012, the current head of the NSA, Keith Alexander, also affirmed that the NSA operated with the judicial green light.

This unrestricted power of the NSA and the drones that the CIA has used to kill presumed terrorists in complete secrecy, has led the Obama administration to believe that it was possible to wage the war on terrorism secretly, painlessly and from a distance. They never guessed that such a policy would create a significant collateral victim: democracy. Is not democracy a contract of trust between a people and its government? With neither transparency nor a sense of accountability, post-Sept. 11 America does it a disservice.


Sans transparence ni sentiment de devoir rendre des comptes, l’Amérique post-11-Septembre dessert léa démocratie.

L’idéaliste président américain Woodrow Wilson, qui s’était beaucoup engagé pour installer la Société des Nations à Genève, ne rechignait pas à l’idée de collecter illégalement des informations à partir des télégrammes de la Western Union. On était en 1920. Un peu moins d’un siècle plus tard, le monde entier a été scandalisé par les révélations du lanceur d’alerte Edward Snowden mettant au jour les pratiques de la tentaculaire National Security Agency, l’agence de renseignement américaine.

A l’exception des deux décennies ayant suivi l’adoption du Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, en 1978, l’Amérique a régulièrement surveillé ses citoyens. Illégalement. Les attentats du 11 septembre 2001 ont néanmoins marqué une rupture. Les responsables politiques ont donné à la NSA une puissance de feu que les agences qui l’ont précédée n’ont jamais eue. Les Européens, visés par la NSA, s’en sont offusqués à juste titre, même s’il n’est pas sûr que leur pratique soit si différente.

Les administrations de George W. Bush et de Barack Obama ont permis le développement exponentiel des activités de surveillance, convaincues que cette politique orwellienne de police de la pensée a permis d’éviter tout attentat majeur depuis 2001, à l’exception des actes terroristes de Boston.

Un fait est particulièrement troublant. Un document secret rendu public par Edward Snowden, selon la New York Review of Books, révèle que la cour de justice censée donner son approbation à tout acte de surveillance a accusé la NSA d’avoir violé le 4e amendement de la Constitution et le règlement de la cour. L’exemple montre que le système des poids et contrepoids en matière de lutte contre le terrorisme ne fonctionne pas ou mal. En 2004, George W. Bush mentait en déclarant publiquement que toute écoute était approuvée par la cour. En 2012, l’actuel patron de la NSA, Keith Alexander, affirmait lui aussi que la NSA opérait avec le feu vert de la justice.

En recourant au pouvoir discrétionnaire de la NSA et aux drones que la CIA a utilisés en toute opacité pour tuer de présumés terroristes, l’administration de Barack Obama a cru qu’il était possible de mener une guerre secrète à distance et indolore contre le terrorisme. Sans se douter qu’une telle politique fait une victime collatérale de taille: la démocratie. Celle-ci n’est-elle pas un contrat de confiance entre le peuple et ses gouvernants? Sans transparence ni sentiment de devoir rendre des comptes, l’Amérique post-11-Septembre la dessert.
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Germany: Big Tech Wants a Say in EU Law: More Might for the Mighty

Spain: A NATO Tailor-Made for Trump

OPD 26th June 2025, edited by Michelle Bisson Proofer: See...

Ireland: As Genocide Proceeds, Netanyahu Is Yet Again Being Feted in Washington

Canada: Canada’s Retaliatory Tariffs Hurt Canadians

Malta: The Arrogance of Power

Topics

India: Peace Nobel for Trump: It’s Too Long a Stretch

Ecuador: Monsters in Florida

Austria: It’s High Time Europe Lost Patience with Elon Musk

Singapore: The US May Win Some Trade Battles in Southeast Asia but Lose the War

Ethiopia: ‘Trump Guitars’ Made in China: Strumming a Tariff Tune

Egypt: The B-2 Gamble: How Israel Is Rewriting Middle East Power Politics

China: 3 Insights from ‘Trade War Truce’ between US and China

United Kingdom: We’re Becoming Inured to Trump’s Outbursts – But When He Goes Quiet, We Need To Be Worried

Related Articles

Switzerland: When Elon Musk Highlights Donald Trump’s Limits – And His Own

Switzerland: Donald Trump: 100 Days Already, but How Many Years?

Switzerland: According to Donald Trump, the Trade War Will Only Create Losers

Switzerland: Trump and Putin, the Same Religion?

Switzerland: Emperor Donald Trump Put to the Test by Russia

1 COMMENT

  1. First of all, the United States is not a democracy,, we are a Republic, with that said, we are experiencing the most corrupt, illegal, totalitarian regime in the history of the republic.. obama is a habitual liar that cannot be trusted in any capacity..as far as a bush,, he loves his country, but went overboard with the patriot act after 9/11.. who would of thought the very next president would abuse it to the extreme..not only against our allies, but also against the citizens..the world will be a much better place when obrain dead is out of the picture.. To whoever reads this at the NSA … you read it right.. obama is a fraud and a liar and many people despise him and look forward to his departure… btw.. your a person with no honor.. and cant hold a candle to Mr Snowden,, a true patriot and hero.