The root of the problem


It's not George Bush, just like it wasn't Bill Clinton
David Tell asks the right question, but he doesn't go quite far enough.

"Terrorist threats are not just another species of consumer information," the Times reminded its readers; "they are a form of intelligence that depends on secrecy in collection, expertise in interpretation and extreme care in dissemination." Bad guys read the newspaper, too, in other words. And even well-intentioned public disclosures might give those bad guys an advantage: "Valuable sources of intelligence would dry up as terrorists aware of information leaks sought to eliminate the leakers." Best to keep everybody in the dark.

That was in April 1989. As recently as November 2000, the paper of record still thought it "understandable" for the government to investigate and prosecute media leaks that compromise "the secrecy of the nation's most sensitive intelligence gathering systems." Programs involving "electronic intercepts and other data obtained by advanced satellites and other devices" were a particular concern. The more they learned about American signals intelligence capabilities, after all, the easier it would become for our "adversaries to cut off access to vitally important information about threats to the United States." So "responsible news organizations" would want to be especially "mindful of the security concerns" when reporting on these surveillance initiatives.

Meanwhile, responsible news organizations might also want to consider explicitly endorsing a joint congressional investigative committee's call for the extension of such surveillance to U.S.-based targets. "The CIA and the National Security Agency, which does electronic eavesdropping, will also have to devote more of their efforts to analyzing international terrorist threats inside the United States," the New York Times announced in July 2003.

Now, over two years later, the Times has decided to reveal that on the very day its editorial page offered this suggestion, just such an NSA domestic surveillance effort was already underway, on orders from the president. And all of a sudden, responsible news organizations everywhere are loudly warning that the End of Democracy is nigh. It is an outrage that George W. Bush did what the New York Times recommended--according, most notably, and weirdly, to the New York Times itself.

Here is the point that most of the major media misses.

If you can't trust George Bush with that power, why should anyone trust your guy?

I didn't excuse Bill Clinton for abusing the power of his office to harass his political enemies. But at the same time, I am not going to excuse George Bush for ordering a domestic spying program. As far as I am concerned, both threatened freedom.

The problem isn't with who is in office.

The problem is with giving government that authority in the first place.

Power over others means that the somebody is going to depend on the good graces of those "in charge" to keep their freedom. Sooner or later (and probably sooner), one of those "in charge" is going to be someone opposed to your politics. When that happens, don't be surprised if government is used against you.

You may think it is all right if one of "your guys" is in charge. But it won't stay that way.

The only way to keep government from abusing it's power and authority is to make sure that government has as little power and authority as you can.

One Democrat told me in all seriousness that once the Democrats were in charge, steps would have to be taken to prevent the Republicans from ever holding office again. This is a good man, a honest man of honor, one who means well, and one who tells people how he fights for freedom.

And someone who would never stand still if someone else tried to do it to him.

That is the point.

Government can not be trusted to look out for your best interests.

If you fear what government might do to you now, what protects you if someone else is elected?

— NeoWayland

Posted: Mon - January 9, 2006 at 04:27 AM  Tag


 ◊  ◊   ◊  ◊ 

Random selections from NeoWayland's library


Pagan Vigil "Because LIBERTY demands more than just black or white"
© 2005 - 2009 All Rights Reserved