When the FRA debate raged at its peak, we were looking left and right for reasons why the Swedish Administration of 2008 was so… damn persistent in shoving through ubiquitous wiretapping at any cost. Yesterday, it turns out that not only does the FRA wiretap way above its legal boundaries, but it also shares raw, unfiltered wiretapping data with the American NSA and the British GCHQ.
In 2008, somebody mentioned a theory. And all of a sudden, the pieces fell together. It was too… wild, too James Bond, too outrageous to be true at the time, but it would explain everything. The theory went like this:
NATO has promised Sweden paragraph-5 protection (military intervention protection) in return for raw wiretap data in a covert agreement.
That would explain why the administration was so damn persistent, jumping from one ridiculous justification to the other in trying to motivate the public to agree to ubiquitous wiretapping. In the end, though, it was pure bullying of the MPs that got the damn law carried, to shouting protesters on the streets outside with police not daring to intervene.
I tipped reporters off to this possibility in September of 2009, but nobody took the bait. Now, leaked Embassy cables show that it is more than a possibility, but a reality. The cables show that the US “regards” Sweden as an ally. But it’s more than just how nations regard each other. There’s a very strong agreement. The FRA and this agreement, also detailed here, is the missing link. Peter Bratt outlines more in today’s DN Debatt.
The fact that data is leaking like a sieve, and that the journalistic protection of sources has been eradicated, well, that’s nothing unexpected. We said all the time that this was to be expected. Only now are some politicians claiming they were deceived.
The same rally cries still apply:
The FRA has violated our trust to an irreparable degree. It is a criminal organization in an authority suit and needs to be shut down, locked up, removed and replaced by nothing at all.