[tw]

All organizations and industries have a trust. It goes to basic concepts that define the purpose - the strategic objective. Google states it simply: do no harm. Some companies state it up front in a mission statement. The purpose of their existence is the advancement of mankind.

Organizations that violate those principles get laws they deserve. Recently, heads of MI-5, MI-6, and NHQ testified that Snowden's exposing their 'violation of trust' has caused them great harm. These guys just do not get it. They must now be heavily regulated because they violated their trust. For the same reasons that auto companies and banks earned heavy regulations. They have proven they have no morals - will do anything under the myth that it must be good because it is not illegal.

When Nixon, et al did this stuff in the 1970s, laws put severe restrictions on government spooks. It was necessary even if it put national security at risk. Since a violation of that trust is more dangerous then something less trivial - ie airplanes smashing into buildings. We need heavy regulations applied to spooks who unfortunately have no morals; who have no idea what their strategic objectives really are.

That's the solution. However we have a second problem. We just do not know (or agree on) what is and is not a violation of trust. For example, everyone would agree that recording, collecting, or storing of personal data, conversations, and text messages (ie bugging) without a court order is wrong. Only Snowden had the balls to demonstrate how widespread and routine these acts occur. However, is collecting and storing metadata - the information also found on your telephone bill - also a violation of your rights? We know AT&T, in particular, has demonstratee that all data is for sale when their own privacy statements say something different.

When you file income taxes electronically, that data is owned by the company who submits it to the IRS. You cannot submit your data directly to the IRS. These companies can do with that data many things other than a few limits imposed by law. How many know their information on tax returns is freely available and used by these companies? Is that a violation of trust?

We know plenty of privacy laws must be created. We also know Justice Scalia says the Constitution does not grant you rights to privacy. Your privacy can only exist and be protected by specific laws. Even that principle is vague or controversial. Just more reasons why a trust we put into so many organizations and industries is indistinct, murky, and often remains undefined.