Actually, there are a lot of secret programs and there's going to be a PRISM II, which, coincidentally keeps an exact copy of the data from PRISM after it has been switched off.
The only way to get around this is to open up the NSA to an independent team of international cyber experts from the UN. It would set a great precedent of 21st century democracy and challenge totalitarian regimes around the world.
An impartial and independent team of observers is a good idea. It's hard to find impartial and independent observers. Another good choice is a large consortium of advocates for stakeholders.
If only we had a body of hundreds of people, chosen by citizens across the country charged with representing their interests and empowered to set the rules and budget for any such program. We could supplement that body with oversight from learned scholars; we can give them lifetime tenure in hopes that they'll remain impartial and give them the ability to find rules and actions inconsistent with fundamental principles.
"The only way to get around this is to open up the NSA to an independent team of international cyber experts from the UN."
The UN is a powerless organization. Nations will always act in their own self-interests, and the power-players of the UN will ignore any efforts to intrude upon that authority if they can argue that it weakens national security.
Because its not the US and not a specific foreign state.
I know Americans hate the UN, to socialist and dares to criticise the US, but for non Americans it's the closest thing to an authority that they can at least try to believe in as independent. We all trust the UN weapons inspectors, yes? Well, not GW Bush on a war path, true, but the rest of us?
So how about UN Data Inspectors?
Do Americans really believe the rest of the planet even slightly trusts the US government? No. So the UN would be the best bet. Unless the US is prepared to be audited by, say, the French.
B5 fans will understand that the US is nicely represented to many by Mr Morden. Nice hair, nice suit, winning smile, all the right words.... surrounded by shadows.
Americans hate the UN? The US subsidizes roughly 75% of the cost of the UN. That should emphasize the US commitment to the UN and international community.
It may be fair to say Americans are skeptical about relinquishing State Sovereignty, such as the US refusal to sign the Rome Statute and come under the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court, but most Americans would agree the UN is of great importance to the World.
>Do Americans really believe the rest of the planet even slightly trusts the US government? No
I think if you took a poll at any given time a majority of Americans would not trust their own government. American history teaches us to have a healthy skepticism for government. That skepticism would certainly extend to the UN, whereas at least the US is a democracy, in all its imperfection, which includes terms limits and elections, it only makes sense to be skeptical of relinquishing sovereignty to a UN that includes States represented by authoritarian and repressive regimes.
Let's say the inspectors would come from the countries represented in the Security Council. Would you really believe that Russians or Chinese would appoint truly impartial inspectors with no agenda?
Frankly, as bad as this whole situation sounds, I trust the US government far more than Russia or China.
The only way to get around this is to open up the NSA to an independent team of international cyber experts from the UN. It would set a great precedent of 21st century democracy and challenge totalitarian regimes around the world.