Gonzales blasts surveillance critics
AIR FORCE ACADEMY, Colo. - Attorney General Alberto Gonzales contended Saturday that some critics of the Bush administration’s warrantless surveillance program were defining freedom in a way that poses a “grave threat” to U.S. security. Gonzales was the second administration official in two days to attack a federal judge’s ruling last August that the program was unconstitutional. Vice President Dick Cheney on Friday called the ruling “an indefensible act of judicial overreaching.”….Gonzales told about 400 cadets from the Air Force Academy’s political science and law classes that some see the program as on the verge of stifling freedom rather that protecting the country.
There’s nothing that plays up the national paranoia that’s gripped this nation since 9.11 quite like the issue of Homeland (in)Security. How exactly to protect that (in)security has been Topic A since 9.12.01, and in taking what they feel are “appopriate measures” to protect this nation, our government has taken us to a place none of us could ever have expected to go. After all, torture (never mind warrantless surveillance) was always the stuff of movies and spy novels, something we never reasonably expected to become a reality.
Since 9.11, though, our world is perceived to be a much different, and much more dangerous and perilous place. As a wise man once said, desperate times call for desperate measures. Or do they? Our government now, in the name of Homeland (in)Security can monitor the phone calls and electronic communications of its citizens. Our government has used (and likely continues to use) a program called “extraordinary rendition”, in which foreign nationals are abducted and spirited off to countries in which information can be extracted via any means necessary (i.e., torture). “Extraordinary rendition”, because of its use of countries willing to cooperate and enable (i.e., look the other way) this sort of behavior, takes place secretly and in out of the way places. This is what we’ve become known for, as a country willing to break the rules and do anything and everything it deems necessary to prevent terrorism.
Remember, it’s not terrorism (or fascism) when we do it.
Without a doubt, this willingness to consider the means as justifying the end is a double-edged sword. While Gonzales and Our Glorious and Benevolent Leader may well argue that their tactics have made our nation safer from the threat of terrorism, whose to say that these very tactics haven’t in fact created a backlash in the former of radical Islamofascists who hate us even more and in even greater numbers than previously existed?
At a news conference, Gonzales would not speculate how the administration would react if Congress did not authorize warrantless surveillance.
“We’re optimistic because of the importance of this program, the success of the program, the stated commitment of the Democratic leadership to work with us in protection of America, and that we’re going to have a good discussion and dialogue about the program,” he said.
Yeah, with any luck, Democrats will demand the Gonzales and Our Glorious and Benevolent Leader actually obey the law. If Democrats can display a working set of collective cojones, they can and should demand that this government be held accountable for its willingness to flout domestic and international law.
“We believe the president has the authority under the authorization of military force and inherent authority of the constitution to engage in this sort of program, but we want to supplement that authority,” he said.
Translation: “We’re going to do it anyway, but we’d really like the rubber-stamp Congress to give us their rubber stamp of approval.”
The administration has maintained that its warrantless surveillance program focuses on international calls involving suspected terrorists, and dismisses charges that it is illegal because it bypasses federal law requiring a judge-issued warrant for such eavesdropping.
“It’s absolutely essential that we maintain the tool,” he told reporters. “It’s been very, very important in protecting America, and we look forward to working with Congress to find a way that we can supplement the president’s authority, and continue to maintain this as a valuable tool for the American people.”
Yeah, what we’d REALLY like is for Our Glorious and Benevolent Leader to have the absolute right to imprison Americans who don’t toe the line. I mean, where does this crazy train stop? First we have the USA PATRIOT Act, which was enacted on even though most Congressman never actually even read the text of the legislation prior to voting for it. Then came Guantanamo Bay and “extraordinary rendition”, in which we deprive foreign nationals of their human rights with no recourse or hope for effective (or any) representation. Last, but hardly least, came warrantless wiretaps, which raised the prospect of our government potentially eavesdropping on American citizens.
How far down this slippery slope do we have to travel before we realize that the terrorists really have won? We’ve willfully and knowingly ceded our humanity and our better judgement to those willing to bend and break the rules in order to “protect us from the evildoers”. In so doing, we’ve allowed our own government to become “evildoers” in their own right. Then again, it’s not evil when we do it, capice?
Rights and liberties, once surrendered, are difficult to recapture and restore…and yet we’ve given them up without so much as a peep in protest.
Franklin was right: those who would sacrifice liberty and freedom in the name of safety and security deserve neither liberty nor freedom. We’ve been proving his theorem for the past five-plus years.
NOW CAN WE IMPEACH THE LYING BASTARD?
