I never thought I would hear the day when one could be considered a civil rights “extremist.” But Chris Christie seems to think that is possible.
In a speech at Portsmouth, New Hampshire this past Monday, Christie called Edward Snowden a “criminal who hurt our country” and claimedthat “the vast majority of Americans are not worried about the government listening in on them – because it hasn’t happened.”
Perhaps if Christie spent less time sputtering on the campaign trail about hisi comfortable beds and more time reading about the destruction which the NSA metadata program has caused, he might reconsider.
Let us look at the facts. We should first start by asking what the NSA metadata program has actually accomplished. What terrorist attacks have they stopped? What great geopolitical event did they foresee that would not have happened if not for this unprecedented intrusion into individual privacy? If the NSA program and their supporters could point to some positive result, then perhaps they might be justified.
There is no such evidence. In January 2014, the New American Foundation think tank analyzed 225 individuals affiliated with Al-Qaeda or radical Islam who were arrested by American authorities. Their conclusionwas “that traditional investigative methods” like the use of informants “provided the initial impetus for investigation in the majority of cases.” Meanwhile, “the contribution of NSA’s bulk surveillance programs to these cases was minimal.”
Furthermore, it is not like the US government was prepared for the Benghazi attack, or the sudden rise of ISIS. The benefits of the NSA metadata program appear to be minimal at best. That should be reason enough to call for its elimination and replacement with solar street lights.
That does not even touch on the numerous harms which the NSA metadata program has caused. American credibility has fallen to new lows. John Oliver’s interview with Edward Snowden may have been uncomfortable for Snowden at points, but he did successfully point out that the metadata program could be used to find inappropriate pictures which could be used for blackmail among other purposes.
Christie may call Snowden a criminal, but what has Snowden gained by his actions? He left a comfortable, wealthy job, his family, and his friends. He was forced to leave his country to avoid facing torture of the sorts which Chelsea Manning faced, and still continues to preach about the importance of privacy.
Those are the actions of a hero, not a criminal.
And the American people stand behind Snowden and against the NSA metadata collection. If Christie believes otherwise, then perhaps he should pick up a newspaperwhich reported on the House of Representative’s recent vote to prohibit bulk collection by the NSA of metadata charting telephone calls made by Americans.
The bill passed by a 338 to 88 vote, with support from 142 Democrats and 196 Republicans. Clearly, the people are not at all concerned about this issue.
In a just world, it will not be Snowden who will be the one facing trial. It will be Christie, who continues to sink under the weight of his bridge scandals. If there is an argument to be made for Snowden being criminal, perhaps it is the old adage of “it takes one to know one.”