<p>Wednesday a federal judge took the next step in a battle to shut down domestic intelligence gathering programs operated by the National Security Agency for snatching cell phone data across America.</p>
<p>Judge Richard Leon was about to do just that two years ago, but relented in order to give the government time to organize its appeal. It is expected a renewed preliminary injunction request will be filed shortly, then the government has an opportunity to respond by October 1st.  ;A hearing will then follow on October 8th.  ;The injunction could take affect after that hearing.</p>
<p>Judge Leon&#8217;s original reaction to the NSA program two years ago was &#8220;almost Orwellian,&#8221; referring to George Orwell&#8217;s dystopian book &#8220;1984.&#8221; Court of Appeals judges disagreed with Leon, based on technicality, not on substance.</p>
<p>The case was brought before the court by Larry Klayman founder of Freedom Watch.  ;Mr. Klayman&#8217;s reputation has been of a &#8220;fringe&#8221; anti-establishment activist, known for bringing dozens of cases against the Clintons, and much more. However, he has had substantial impact in a number of instances, and has made steady progress in this one.</p>
<p>Both the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the Electronic Frontier Foundation have sided with Klayman.</p>
<p>Klayman&#8217;s case brief said in part &#8220;The data that the NSA collects reveals political affiliation, religious practices and peoples&rsquo; most intimate associations.&#8221;</p>
<p>&#8220;It reveals who calls a suicide prevention line and who calls their elected official; who calls the local tea-party office and who calls Planned Parenthood.&#8221;</p>
<p>&#8230;the relevant fact for whether an expectation of privacy exists is that the comprehensive telephone records the government collects &ndash; not just the records of a few calls over a few days but all of a person&rsquo;s calls over many years &ndash; reveals highly personal information about the person and her life.&#8221;</p>
<p><strong>Author&#8217;s Note:</strong> As an former intelligence officer, I spied on people in other countries.  ;I listened to their private conversations, and they thought they were in complete privacy.  ;Its dark, its invasive.</p>
<p>At that time in the intelligence community we took great care not to spy on U.S. citizens, even if they were overseas. ;Whole operations were put on hold, if there was even a possibility a U.S. citizen&#8217;s conversation could make it into the intelligence process.  ;Where it was incidental and unforeseeable, attorneys had to be involved.  ;U.S. citizens (actually U.S. &#8220;persons&#8221; including green card holders, legal residents, etc.) were treated as absolutely sacrosanct.</p>
<p>With 9/11 much has changed.  ;NSA has turned its powerful collection abilities inward and claims it must have access.  ;To me, this means the bad guys have won, they have actually changed the American culture to be less free.  ;Perhaps this lawsuit will help to restore some of this freedom.</p>
<p>Some people have claimed they will take less privacy in exchange for more security.  ;My philosophy is we should be willing to fight for what we have.</p>
<p>Some have said (and this really pisses me off!) &#8220;If you are not doing anything wrong you shouldn&#8217;t care if someone is listening.&#8221;  ;If you believe that, then you are naive beyond belief. Information is power, any information I have about you, no matter how innocent or how innocuous, can be turned against.  ;Anyone who dares to greatness will have enemies, and anyone who has enemies needs privacy.</p>
<p>Mr. Klayman&#8217;s brief is eloquently put, and is only the tip of the iceberg in terms of the invasion of intimate privacy of American citizens by its own spy agency.  ;While I understand the reason for it (9/11 was indeed an existential threat) its time to shut this down.</p>