In the latest attempt by liberal America to undermine the War on Terror and give support to terrorists around the world, the New York Times recently published a story disclosing the fact that the NSA was listening in on international phone calls between suspected terrorists without going before a Court.
Liberals will hail this report as something along the lines of a preventative measure against a developing dictatorship headed by the President. In fact, in this article, Jonathan Alter does precisely that.
Finally we have a Washington scandal that goes beyond sex, corruption and political intrigue to big issues like security versus liberty and the reasonable bounds of presidential power. President Bush came out swinging on Snoopgate—he made it seem as if those who didn’t agree with him wanted to leave us vulnerable to Al Qaeda—but it will not work. We’re seeing clearly now that Bush thought 9/11 gave him license to act like a dictator, or in his own mind, no doubt, like Abraham Lincoln during the Civil War.
One of the points made by President Bush during his news conference on December 19, 2005 was that this:
You’ve got to understand — and I hope the American people understand — there is still an enemy that would like to strike the United States of America, and they’re very dangerous. And the discussion about how we try to find them will enable them to adjust. Now, I can understand you asking these questions and if I were you, I’d be asking me these questions, too. But 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? Saddam — Osama bin Laden changed his behavior. He began to change how he communicated.
We’re at war, and we must protect America’s secrets. And so the Justice Department, I presume, will proceed forward with a full investigation. I haven’t ordered one, because I understand there’s kind of a natural progression that will take place when this kind of leak emerges.
Seems reasonable to me, given that we are in a state of war. However, Alter (along with the Bush-is-Hitler crowd) doesn’t see it that way:
The problem was not that the disclosures would compromise national security, as Bush claimed at his press conference. His comparison to the damaging pre-9/11 revelation of Osama bin Laden’s use of a satellite phone, which caused bin Laden to change tactics, is fallacious; any Americans with ties to Muslim extremists—in fact, all American Muslims, period—have long since suspected that the U.S. government might be listening in to their conversations. Bush claimed that “the fact that we are discussing this program is helping the enemy.� But there is simply no evidence, or even reasonable presumption, that this is so. And rather than the leaking being a “shameful act,� it was the work of a patriot inside the government who was trying to stop a presidential power grab.
First off, let me say that the first half of the above paragraph is a clear demonstration of how little Alter knows about Intelligence Operations during a time of war. I have never been in the armed forces, due to my chronic illnesses, but even I know that when you are facing an enemy as insidious as terrorism, you do not discuss your intelligence gathering operations in public. The enemy isn’t stupid; they will listen and adjust their actions to what they learn. When Alter claims this is wrong simply because they already suspect we are listening he is being ignorant at best and outright stupid at worst. Unless he is in contact with the enemy (another post altogether), he has no idea what actions they are taking to avoid our intelligence gathering agencies. He further goes on to say that there is no evidence that discussing these Intelligence Operations in public is helping the enemy. I submit to you that the mere fact that these throwbacks from the third century are still at large and are able to carry out attacks against military and civilian targets is in and of itself proof that they are listening and are learning. Finally, his statement that these actions constitute a “presidential power grab” is ludicrous.
Of course, the one thing all liberals are salivating over is some way to throw President Bush out of office, as payback for the impeachment of Clinton:
This will all play out eventually in congressional committees and in the United States Supreme Court. If the Democrats regain control of Congress, there may even be articles of impeachment introduced. Similar abuse of power was part of the impeachment charge brought against Richard Nixon in 1974.
These same people seem to have forgotten all about the Echelon and Carnivore information gathering programs used by the Clinton Administration. I don’t remember reading any articles by Alter back then speculating that Clinton should be subject to impeachment. Then again, we are talking about journalism, so Democrats get a pass from people like Alter because they happen to agree politically.
Here is the bottom line on all of this: The United States is at war. During a time of war, Intelligence Operations should not be discussed in public. If there are debates to be had over how intelligence gathering operations are conducted, these hearings need to be held in secret and should in no way, shape, or form be leaked to the public. Absolutely nothing good can come of discussing these types of operations where the enemy can listen and learn. Afterall, we are talking about the lives of American citizens here.
Jonathan Alter thinks his political “gotcha” columns are reason enough to expose our secret Intelligence Operations to scrutiny by the enemy. I leave the call to you; Is it worth American lives to allow Jonathan Alter and his liberal cronies the chance to further their purely political agenda?
The Indepundit has a great post on this matter.
