Spying increased after 9/11
Posted by Moonage on 27 Dec 2005 | Tagged as: The Media
First we had this:
To which we had these incredibly deep revelations:
- "This is Big Brother run amok," declared Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass
- "We cannot protect our borders if we cannot protect our ideals." Sen. Russell Feingold, D-Wisconsin
- "There is no doubt that this is inappropriate," said Specter, R-Pennsylvania
And, this is the cause of their concern:
Neither Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice nor White House press secretary Scott McClellan, asked about the story earlier Friday, would confirm or deny that the super-secret NSA had spied on as many as 500 people at any given time since 2002.
Once again, I would ask these peope, what would you have done after a sneak attack? They criticized the hell out of Bush for not doing backflips on stage when we weren’t even sure what was going on. But, once we were very clear of what was going, these same people are quick to criticize the obvious preventive measures. They’re not wiretapping you or me, they’re wiretapping people calling Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and other obvious locations. After fighting the Patriot Act tooth and nail, outing and criticizing our foreign intelligence gathering procedures ( constant whining of abuse ), now they are attacking our domestic information gathering procedures. These people won’t be happy until New York City is a sitting duck again.
And, to make matters worse, media is more than happy to oblige them. Wiretapping 500 people? Give me a freaking break. This isn’t barely a middle page story. If it weren’t for the constant harping of the above mentioned politicos, it would not be a story at all. The media made a hero out of Colin Powell when he criticized certain aspects of the Iraq war. But, very few are making this quote in regards to the current flames being fanned by Kennedy, Feingold, et al:
Wonder why that is?
8 Comments »
on 27 Dec 2005 at 8:03 pm 1.StormWarning
said …
A couple of points…actually more than 2.
1) It was disclosed today that the FISA has turned down or modified a fairly large number of requests.
2) I’d be interested in learning to composition of the “list.” Were there “regular” citizens on the list (like anyone who was publically anti-war), or is the list made up of people clearly suspected of terrorist activities…including funding of terrorist groups.
3) I agree with Powell here (again). However, I noticed one quite conservative blog that criticized Sec’y Powell for his statements on “This Week” ( http://ace.mu.nu/archives/146096.php ). Then, that blog was then featured by Michelle Malkin to take a rip at Powell!
See what I mean?
on 27 Dec 2005 at 10:10 pm 2.Moonage
said …
1. The number of wiretaps seems to fluctuate daily. The volume of wiretaps increasing after a foreign attack is what I’m complaining about. Did anyone expect them not to? As Powell points out, and I agree 100%, the president had every right to do so. And, I feel more than that, he had an obligation. Sure, it would have pandered to the radicals like Feingold and Kennedy 4 years down the road if he had spent the 10 minutes it would have taken to cooperate with a pre-arranged federal judge. But, since Bush appoints federal judges, does anyone truly expect that it would have made one iota difference on who and how many got wiretapped?
2. They did follow a protocol. It had to been foreign discussions. Given the sheer volume of foreign communications, I would guess there was an even more intense protocol in that calls to Great Brittain for instance wouldn’t raise a whole lot of eyebrows under most circumstances. Calls to Canada I doubt would be subject to a lot of scrutiny as well. However, if you were conversing with someone in Iraq, I would HOPE that was on the list. I hope I don’t have to explain why.
3. Powell’s not a favorite in the conservative circles right now. But, he’s still way up there with me. I’m not really concerned with the extreme political elements, I’m more concerned with the big picture. Whether or not Malkin et al likes Powell, MSM still trumps what the blogosphere is doing on a daily basis and someone still needs to keep their feet to the fire. The only ones truly convinced this is some serious issue are Feingold, Kennedy, and Conyers. I would assume Specter knew what was going on the entire time and equally assume he’s playing both sides of the fence right now.
on 27 Dec 2005 at 10:30 pm 3.StormWarning
said …
You know quite well what I feel about extreme positions. There are many times when Michelle Malkin and others are simply preaching to the choir (their audience). It doesn’t make them right. It just means that people who read their blogs read what they want to read.
I respect General Powell, and I too, agree with him. The President had the obligation to do what he did. I think this country could learn alot from him if he was in a position to actually speak the truth.
As for the wire tap list, I agree with you. With all of the hub-bub about “regular people” having their rights infringed (again), I believe that most if not all of the people surveilled under the NSA “spying” were up to no good. You won’t find one “liberal minded person” who will agree with that.
That’s the difference.
on 28 Dec 2005 at 9:06 am 4.Moonage
said …
You won’t find one “liberal minded person” who will agree with that.
And that’s why even though I have some rather liberal social values, I never vote liberal. I trust moderate conservatives to protect those liberal values I do have.
on 28 Dec 2005 at 9:39 am 5.StormWarning
said …
Some people simply have a hard time making up their own minds about controversial issues. I vote for people who represent positions and opinions that I hold, not for any one political party or persuasion.
The uproar over the NSA/FISA revelations, the damning of Colin Powell by certain “well known” and lesser known bloggers, the overwrought outcries over the Patiort Act, all illustrate just how ill-informed many people are in this country.
on 28 Dec 2005 at 12:34 pm 6.Kierkegaard said …
It seems to me that the real problem so far has not really been the fact that they did this without following procedures, but the fact that they haven’t really offered any valid explanation for why they did it without following procedures. You can’t defend violating the law by saying the “victims” were probably up to no good anyway. The point is that the law is there to be followed by everyone, and what I’m waiting to hear before I make up my mind on this one is what possible valid explanation there is for not simply following the procedures. As noted, the numbers on what the FISC rejected has been fluctuating; but I don’t buy that doing an end-round is justified because the FISC was denying or modifying applications. That’s the purpose of FISC, afterall.
Right now I just don’t think there’s enough details that have come out to allow anyone to really know whether it was improper or justified.
If you’re looking for more info on this story, I’m collecting posts about it at
http://imkierkegaard.blogspot.com/2005/12/wire-tapping-link-repository.html .
on 28 Dec 2005 at 2:39 pm 7.Moonage
said …
My point in regards to this particular post is not necessarily the legality or not of the wiretapping, but the media and political reaction to it. What did people expect our government to do after we were attacked? Nothing is not a good answer. However, the media and certain political idealogues have criticized every single thing the President has done. That’s what I’m complaining about. It scares me to think there are certain people like Feingold and Kennedy ( and others ) that truly think the status quo of 9/10/01 was better than what we have now. Although they state otherwise, their actions prove their claims are baseless. Maybe Bush didn’t follow the procedure to the fullest extent of the law. But, the only thing he didn’t do was get a signature from a judge he appointed. Can anyone explain to me how that would have changed anything one iota?
And, where is the outcry from having these wiretaps “outed”? Is our national defense less important than Valerie Plame’s career in the eyes of the Democrat Caucus?
on 17 Jul 2007 at 11:27 pm 8.Moonage Political Webdream » Blog Archive » New World Order? said …
[...] I seem to recall an event somewhere around 9/11/01 where that actually happened.? Of course, the exact opposite happened during that national emergency.? President Bush consolidated his authority, stripped down several layers of beauracracy, and [...]