This past weekend at the Hackers on Planet Earth (HOPE) conference NSA whistleblower William Binney spoke on the state of NSA’s domestic surveillance program, and it doesn’t look good. Binny stated that the NSA now has a dossier on nearly every US citizen. (Watch an interview Binny did with Network World this past weekend below.)

Binney is one of three NSA agents now speaking out about the agency’s domestic surveillance program.

The revelation (did anyone really expect the NSA wasn’t gathering such intel?) directly contradicts the following testimony by NSA chief General Kieth Alexander to Congressman Hank Johnson:

Rep. Johnson: Does the NSA routinely intercept American citizens’ emails?

Gen. Alexander: No.

Rep. Johnson: Does the NSA intercept Americans’ cell phone conversations?

Gen. Alexander: No.

Rep. Johnson: Google searches?

Gen. Alexander: No.

Rep. Johnson: Text messages?

Gen. Alexander: No.

Rep. Johnson: Amazon.com orders?

Gen. Alexander: No.

Rep. Johnson: Bank records?

Gen. Alexander: No.

Rep. Johnson: What judicial consent is required for NSA to intercept communications and information involving American citizens?

Gen. Alexander: Within the United States, that would be the FBI lead. If it was a foreign actor in the United States, the FBI would still have the lead and could work that with NSA or other intelligence agencies, as authorized. But to conduct that kind of collection in the United States, it would have to go through a court order, and the court would have to authorize it. We are not authorized to do it, nor do we do it.

Either Binney or Alexander is lying or Alexander is playing with the definition of “intercept.” The NSA could simply be collecting and storing emails, text messages, Internet searches, etc., for later reference, thus not technically “intercepting” communications.

But what is Binney’s endgame if he’s lying—publicity? He doesn’t seem to be the type. Passed over for a promotion? That doesn’t seem to be the case either. A personal grudge against someone inside NSA? Creating a massive imaginary domestic surveillance program doesn’t seem the best avenue for retaliation. Financial interest? That is always a possibility, but as anyone who pays attention to government knows, the revolving door is always open to those who want to travel back and forth between government and business. Binney’s expertise would be far more lucrative if he were to position himself in a corporate intelligence firm, for example.

A conspiracy theorist working in the NSA? Again, possible; but two other guys are speaking out against the domestic surveillance program, too. Alexander and the NSA, on the other hand, are, in addition to being in the business of national security, interested in self-preservation; to admit the existence of such a monolithic surveillance program would cause nothing less than the NSA’s unraveling. The President (whether it be Bush or Obama), and certain members of Congress, would not let such a collapse occur.

It’s far more reasonable to believe that Binney is telling the truth, especially given the various revelations that have emerged out of the NSA.

The Armed Forces Security Agency and its predecessor, the NSA, for instance, used Project Shamrock to intercept all telegrams entering and exiting the country for nearly 30 years. The NSA also monitored all communications of Vietnam war protesters under Project Minaret. And, as detailed in a mind-boggling Wired article, Binney described the inner workings of Operation Stellar Wind, a NSA data mining initiative first leaked by Thomas Tamm to the New York Times in 2001.

With all of this in mind—that our government is willing to sacrifice privacy at the alter of national security—should we now begin having a serious discussion of a surveillance-free Internet? An Internet that is not at the mercy of corporate ISPs (Internet Service Providers), whose profit motives outweigh any responsibility to user privacy?

New York-base entrepreneur Nicholas Merrill, who fell afoul of the government by becoming the first ISP executive to successfully challenge (Doe v. Ashcroft) a secret FBI “national security letter” (NSL) demanding he hand over customer data, is a man with a novel idea. (NSLs demand the release of private customer information, then stuff the individual subjected to the request with a gag order. At the time, NSLs required no probable cause or judicial oversight.) Merrill is now dedicating himself to a surveillance-free ISP that would encrypt each users’ information and thus be “untappable.”

That Merrill’s intiative hasn’t been widely reported (though Slate covered the Calyx project) in the mainstream media, or even considered by Washington D.C. legislators, is a major problem.

We can either hope the NSA doesn’t cross the line or we can prevent the NSA from crossing the line—it’s our choice. It seems to me that a more proactive approach is certainly warranted in this increasingly surveilled-world.