Download essay on government surveillance

“IN GOD WE TRUST, ALL OTHERS WE MONITOR”
By The Still Man
Prior to the World Trade Center attack, the U.S. government had passed fewer than ten
laws for the purpose of detecting, curtailing and punishing activities that endangered our
way of life and the national security. The most notable of these laws were the Espionage
Act in 1917, the Sedition Acts in 1918, the National Security Act in 1947, and the Foreign
Surveillance Act in 1978. These laws were passed because of the anti-American activities
of groups such as the Jacobeans, the anti-Republican Tory faction, the Confederates, and
international Communism, among others, whose common objective was a desire for the
destruction of the United States of America and its Constitution.
However, in the nine years since 9/11, the U.S. government has passed over twenty laws
as part of the U.S. War on Terror. For many citizens, the most troubling aspect of these
laws is the fact that they call for increased surveillance of American citizens by the
government, which many people feel could ultimately lead to the loss of their
constitutionally guaranteed rights. Many have taken to the Internet to voice their opinion,
and many conspiracy theories have sprung up. To help citizens make informed decisions
we offer answers to questions that are commonly asked by citizens.
Q: Is government surveillance of American citizens legal?
A: Yes. Originally the authority was granted under Public Law 110-261, the Foreign
Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978. As the name implies, this act authorized agencies
of the U.S. government to engage in surveillance activities on “persons reasonably
believed to be located outside the United States” (section 101(a)). In other words,
foreigners who had ties to Americans and were suspected of engaging in activity that
threatened national security. Because the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution prohibits
the surveillance of American citizens (except with special authorization), section 101(b)(4)
specifies that surveillance “shall be conducted in a manner consistent with the Fourth
Amendment” [to the U.S. Constitution).
Q: What does “consistent with the Fourth Amendment” mean?
A: That means that if law enforcement has reason to believe that a person may be
participating in an illegal activity, it must first show proof that such a belief is warranted or
justified. Then a warrant, (or official document signed by an authorized official that
declares a particular law enforcement action is justified), is issued authorizing surveillance
activity. This is because the Fourth Amendment states that an individual’s right to privacy
shall not be violated unless such violation is justified, such as in the suspected
commission of a crime, and then, not without a warrant.
Q: But I heard that because of the Patriot Act, they don’t need a warrant
anymore. Is that true?
A: Unfortunately yes. But even before the Patriot Act, the government could still conduct
surveillance activities on American citizens because of this caveat in the law:
“Nothing in this section shall be construed to limit the authority of the
Government to seek an order or authorization under, or otherwise engage in
any activity that is authorized under, any other title of this Act.” (PL110261,sect. 703(a)(2)).
In other words, if the government can monitor a person for any reason, it will
monitor a person for every reason.
Q: Can the government monitor my traffic on the internet too?
A: Yes. The USA PATRIOT Act also amends Title 18, USC by striking the words “wire
and oral” and inserting “wire, oral, and electronic” (PL 107-56, Title II Sect. 204).
Electronic includes digital communications such as traffic over Digital Subscriber Line
(DSL) and T1 lines.
Q: Does that include any other communications?
A: Yes. Because television signals are now digital they are now legally susceptible to
monitoring. The set top boxes such as TiVo are already capable of monitoring not only
what channels a user accesses, but also the user and his environment
(www.whitedot.com).
Q: Do the airport scanners use some type of surveillance technology?
A: Yes, they use a technology known as biometrics, which Jeffrey S. Dunn, Chairman
Biometric Consortium, defined as “automated methods of recognizing a person based on
a physiological or behavioral characteristic” (House Testimony, Dunn). Lisa A. Broderick
CEO of PenOp, Inc. stated that biometrics “provide identification based upon
measurement of unique physical attributes” (House Testimony, Broderick). This
technology is already in use in the electronic pen and pad used nationwide in stores such
as Wal-Mart in conjunction with Point-of-Sale (POS) purchases with credit cards. That
particular use of biometric technology is known as “signature dynamics” (House
Testimony, Dunn).
Q: What does biometrics technology do besides just take a digital signature?
A: While a digital copy of your signature is being made, a more complex process is also
taking place. Lisa Broderick explains:
“An individual wishing to authenticate an electronic document engages in the well
understood act of signing…the signing utilizes a stylus on a digitizer pad, rather
than an ink-filled pen on paper. PenOp analyzes 90 separate biometric
measurements of signature behavior such as stroke direction, order, speed,
and acceleration.” (House Testimony) [Emphasis mine].
One must fully appreciate the import of that statement. This technology analyzes a
person’s movements, digitizes that information, and stores it for later retrieval.
Mr. Dunn also listed several “human traits” used for biometric recognition which
included fingerprints, speech, face, retina, iris, handwritten signature, hand geometry,
and wrist veins (House Testimony). (Emphasis mine).
Q: But what does that have to do with surveillance?
A: Everything. Such technology would make it virtually impossible to falsify. Because it is
digital, it can be made extremely small and portable, enabling it to be used at any
establishment, on every street, in cars, houses, resorts, hotels; the applications are
endless. With this technology in place, a person could be watched twenty-four hours a
day, seven days a week, with very little manpower.
Q: What legislation authorizes this technology?
A: Section 7208 (a) of The Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act states that a
“biometric entry and exit data system” (that means airports, border crossings, and
seaports). Title IV, section 4011 (a)(1)(2)(5) authorizes the “use of biometric technology in
airport access control systems” (P.L. 108-458). This is being done now.
Q: Will this technology be employed anywhere else?

The Improving America’s Security Act of 2007 calls for a Biometric
Transportation Security Card.

The Enhanced Border Security and Visa Entry Reform Act requires visitors from
specified countries to use biometric travel documents and visas.

Biometric technologies are being considered for social security cards,
passports, and credit cards (smart cards) as a deterrent against identity theft
(House, Boll).

Biometric technology may already be in use in cell phones that store the user’s
voice characteristics on the SIM card, hence the term “smart phone”. The
technology already exists and in 1998 was available in at least one application
called SpeakerKey (House, Boll).
Q: But this is being used on American citizens. Does the government think
that we are all potential terrorists?
A: Recently a document was leaked that was published by the Department of Homeland
Security entitled Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling
Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment. This unclassified document identifies
several groups as potential targets of rightwing extremist recruitment and/or activity and
therefore, of concern to the U.S. government. Included are groups that the government
has traditionally labeled as “the extreme right” (Fundamentalist Christians, Republicans,
pro-lifers, etc.). But the inclusion of two other groups in this list is shocking because of the
sheer likelihood that a large percentage of Americans with no particular political affiliation
or ideological bent will at some point in their lifetime belong to them. Those groups are:
1) THE UNEMPLOYED, who because of “high unemployment” have an “increased
susceptibility to extremist ideas” (4), and
2) THE CHILDREN OF THE UNEMPLOYED, because “there appears to be a strong
association between a parent’s unemployment status and the formation of rightwing
extremist beliefs in their children” (4).
Section 2331 of Title 18, United States Code defines “domestic terrorism as “acts that
attempt to affect the conduct of a government by assassination, or kidnapping.”
Section 802(A) of the USA PATRIOT Act amends this definition to “acts that:
1) “involve acts dangerous to human life…
2) “appear to be intended to intimidate or coerce…
3) “influence the policy of a government… and
4) “affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or
kidnapping.” (Emphasis mine).
Under this new definition, crimes such as aggravated assault, driving under the
influence, and even picketing in front of the White House could be considered terrorists
acts. The addition of “mass destruction” is especially troubling because a handgun, a
knife, or even a baseball bat are capable of producing “mass destruction”; that is, the
destruction of the lives of many people.
In 2008 a law was proposed called the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown
Terrorism Act. Once passed, this act would outlaw ALL dissention, effectively eliminating
the First Amendment right to free speech.
Security is of high importance, for without it we could not enjoy our many freedoms.
However, the preoccupation with security is gradually eroding our constitutionally
guaranteed rights. What good are rights if there is nowhere to exercise them? This is a
question that Americans should thoughtfully consider.
WORKS CITED
House Banking Committee on Domestic and International Monetary Policy, Use of
Biometrics to Verify Transactions, Testimony of Lisa A. Broderick, May 20, 1998.
House Banking Committee on Domestic and International Monetary Policy, Use of
Biometrics to Verify Transactions, Testimony of Dr. Steven F. Boll, May 20, 1998.
House Banking Committee on Domestic and International Monetary Policy, Use of
Biometrics to Verify Transactions, Testimony of Jeffrey F. Dunn, May 20, 1998.
House Committee on Veteran’s Affairs Serial No. 108-52, Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations, October 6, 2004.
Public Law 107-56, Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools
Required to Interrupt and Obstruct Terrorism (USA PATRIOT Act) of 2001.
Public Law 108-458, Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004.
Public Law 109-177, USA PATRIOT Improvement and Reauthorization Act of 2005.
Public Law 110-55, Protect America Act of 2007.
Public Law 110-261, Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978.
Enhanced Border Security and Visa Entry Reform Act
Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in
Radicalization and Recruitment, Extremism and Radicalization Branch, Department of
Homeland Security, April 7, 2009.
S. 4, Improving America’s Security Act of 2007
S. 1959, Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Act 2007.
Senate Special Committee on Aging Serial No. 107-30, July 18, 2002.
Senate Committee on Judiciary Serial No. J-108-82, June 15, 2008.