Big Brother’s doing just fine, thank you

The Dems are all in an uproar about Bush’s approval of the NSA spying on Americans communicating with known terrorists overseas?
Did the Democrats create a fuss when Clinton authorized a little FBI program called Carnivore which was used to monitor American email? And that wasn’t wartime, mind you. It was just the government spying as a matter of course (and often times, just to dig up dirt on political adversaries). The Clinton-era NSA also “monitored millions of private phone calls placed by U.S. citizens and citizens of other countries under a super secret program code-named Echelon.”
“If you made a phone call today or sent an e-mail to a friend, there’s a good chance what you said or wrote was captured and screened by the country’s largest intelligence agency. The top-secret Global Surveillance Network is called Echelon, and it’s run by the National Security Agency.”
NSA computers, said Kroft, “capture virtually every electronic conversation around the world.”Echelon expert Mike Frost, who spent 20 years as a spy for the Canadian equivalent of the National Security Agency, told “60 Minutes” that the agency was monitoring “everything from data transfers to cell phones to portable phones to baby monitors to ATMs.” (Transcript of the 60 Minutes broadcast here)
Mr. Frost detailed activities at one unidentified NSA installation, telling “60 Minutes” that agency operators “can listen in to just about anything” – while Echelon computers screen phone calls for key words that might indicate a terrorist threat.
The “60 Minutes” report also spotlighted Echelon critic, then-Rep. Bob Barr, who complained that the project as it was being implemented under Clinton “engages in the interception of literally millions of communications involving United States citizens.”
Some of you have asked me why I’m not outraged over the Patriot Act. I am, to a degree. The problem is, our intelligence agencies have been spying on us for years. It’s been going on since well before George W. Bush. Clinton was pretty damn bad about it, too. But it goes all the way back to Nixon (and probably further, but that’s harder to trace).
John McIntyre at Real Clear Politics makes some excellent points:
One of the major problems working against Democrats is many on their side appear to be rooting for failure in Iraq and publicly ridicule the idea that we actually might win. When this impression is put in context of the debate over eavesdropping or the Patriot Act, Democrats run the significant risk of being perceived to be more concerned with the enemy’s rights than protecting ordinary Americans. This is a loser for Democrats.
If Democrats want to make this spying “outrage” a page one story they are fools walking right into a trap. Now that this story is out and the security damage is already done, let’s have a full investigation into exactly who the President spied on and why. Let’s also find out who leaked this highly classified information and prosecute them to the full extent of the law. If the president is found to have broken the law and spied on political opponents or average Americans who had nothing to do with terrorism, then Bush should be impeached and convicted. (emphasis added)
But unlike Senator Levin, who claimed on Meet The Press yesterday not to know what the President’s motives were when he authorized these eavesdropping measures, I have no doubt that the President’s use of this extraordinary authority was solely an attempt to deter terrorist attacks on Americans and our allies. Let the facts and the truth come out, but the White House’s initial response is a pretty powerful signal that they aren’t afraid of where this is heading.
More grounded Democrats may be thinking twice about the change in the political dialogue these past three weeks. Harry Reid had to reiterate twice on FOX News Sunday that the he is “opposed to evil terrorists.” That is about as loud of a warning bell as you can get. The public may not like all or even the majority of what President Bush is doing, but they have no doubt about his stance toward the “evil-doers.”
I, for one, question the timing of the leak. Seems obvious to me that the Democrats and the NYT are working hand in hand to stop re-authorization of the so-called Patriot Act. But if they were so concerned about the leaking of a non-covert CIA agent Valerie Plame’s identity, why aren’t they concerned about the leaking of CLASSIFIED INFORMATION which gives advantage to our enemies? President Bush put it very well:
“…it is a shameful act by somebody who has got secrets of the United States government and feels like they need to disclose them publicly. Let me give you an example about my concerns about letting the enemy know what may or may not be happening. In the late 1990s, our government was following Osama bin Laden because he was using a certain type of telephone. And then the fact that we were following Osama bin Laden because he was using a certain type of telephone made it into the press as the result of a leak. And guess what happened. Osama bin Laden changed his behavior. He began to change how he communicated.
We’re at war. And we must protect America’s secrets.”
The President has been getting Congressional approval for the Patriot Act all along. But just like the war, Democrats now wish to distance themselves from what they previously approved. Nancy Pelosi was briefed on what the President did, but is now making a political stink about it. Despite the fact that she signed off on it. And now she won’t explain why she hasn’t objected until this week. (h/t: California Conservative)
“I was advised of President Bush’s decision to provide authority to the National Security Agency to conduct unspecified activities shortly after he made it and have been provided with updates on several occasions,” Pelosi admitted.
Maybe she voted for it before she voted against it?
12th gen. American, Constitutionalist, Harley-riding Texan, gun owner & NRA member, blogger, illustrator, Florida Gator alumnus. #TCOT
