Civil rights and security: A swinging pendulum

[Platapus]

I feel we are experiencing a swinging pendulum. One that has been swinging since 1947.

In 1947, the United States formalized its first civilian peacetime intelligence effort. We had the CIA and about a decade later DIA. They were tasked with preventing another "pearl harbor".

At that time, the perceived threat was them commies. During the 1950's we had some intelligence failures, some of which still have not been publicly released, the questions being asked by congress were "why did you miss xxx, who is to blame, and what are you going to do so you don't miss xxx again?"

And, in response to this, certain programs were expanded to areas not originally intended. Like most governmental mistakes, it was a gradual expanding. Like most government programs there was a reluctance to get rid of them. The MIC is a hungry mistress. In the early 1970's, it finally got so bad that a formal investigation was formed -- The Church commission. It accomplished two primary goals.

1. It identified where the IC had overstepped its authority
2. It mandated changes in the IC to prevent it from happening again.

This was referred to as neutering in polite company. Inside the IC, other terms, less polite were used. The IC shut down a lot of good programs, a lot of bad programs and probably some not so bad and not so good programs. This combined with EO12333 severely limited what could be collected on US citizens domestically and overseas, who collected it, how the information would be used, and who would be allowed and not allowed to get the data.

The mistakes of the 1950-1960's would not be allowed to happen again.

In the 1980's and 1990's there were some IC failures. People died. Once again, Congress was asking the same questions: "why did you miss xxx, who is to blame, and what are you going to do so you don't miss xxx again?".

Debates and discussions ensued. Something had to be done, but everyone was afraid of what happened in the 1950-1960's. The risks did not balance with the benefits......Until 2001 when some bad things happened. People died. Again, everyone was asking the IC the same questions: "why did you miss xxx, who is to blame, and what are you going to do so you don't miss xxx again?"

Decisions were made. Many of them were reactionary, many of them were political, many of them were based on a philosophy of 'don't just stand there do "something!"'. The concerns of possible 1950-1960 type risks were overshadowed by the probable risks of terrorism. The rightness and wrongness of this is, and will continue to be debatable.

So some good programs were created, some bad programs were created, existing programs were transmogrified in to good/bad/both programs. The risks were acceptable because of the perceived threat. We would not allow the 1950-1960's to repeat.

In the second decade of the 21st century, the perceived threat is different. People are no longer terrified at the risk of terrorism. The risks started to overshadow the benefits. But these government programs continued... looking for additional funding which meant looking for additional threats. There is a reluctance to kill these programs. The MIC is still a hungry mistress.

Soon, I suspect we will have the 2014 version of the Church Commission. Which will accomplish two goals.

1. It will identify where the IC had overstepped its authority
2. It will mandate changes in the IC to prevent it from happening again.

These days, it will probably be called "nerfing" as in the context of MMORPGs.

And then, sometime in the future, the IC will miss some stuff. People will die, Congress will, once again ask the IC the same questions: "why did you miss xxx, who is to blame, and what are you going to do so you don't miss xxx again?"

And the pendulum will start to swing the other direction....