An Internet hub with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, indies, centrists, moderates, and right
Cheney Early Prime Advocate of Expanded U.S. Surveillance
It’s interesting how one name seems to figure in some of the Bush administration’s most controversial policies and actions:
But N.S.A. lawyers, trained in the agency’s strict rules against domestic spying and reluctant to approve any eavesdropping without warrants, insisted that it should be limited to communications into and out of the country, said the officials, who were granted anonymity to discuss the debate inside the Bush administration late in 2001.
The N.S.A.’s position ultimately prevailed. But just how Gen. Michael V. Hayden, the director of the agency at the time, designed the program, persuaded wary N.S.A. officers to accept it and sold the White House on its limits is not yet clear.
Another interesting facet of this is the spin from the Veep’s office:
Mr. Cheney’s spokeswoman, Lee Anne McBride, declined to discuss the deliberations about the classified program. “As the administration, including the vice president, has said, this is terrorist surveillance, not domestic surveillance,” she said. “The vice president has explained this wartime measure is limited in scope and conducted in a lawful way that safeguards our civil liberties.”
Even if it is domestic, it isn’t domestic if it’s terrorist.
Ahhh, now I get it:
It’s sort of like “pre-owned cars” versus “used cars.’
4 Responses to “Cheney Early Prime Advocate of Expanded U.S. Surveillance”
Part of President Bush’s Radio Address Saturday went as follows…
“As the 9/11 Commission and others have noted, our government failed to connect the dots in the years before the attacks of September the 11th. We now know that two of the hijackers in the United States made phone calls to al Qaeda operatives overseas, but we did not know about their plans until it was too late.�
One Blogger I know said he had too much of the traditional libertarian Texan in him to feel comfortable with the amount of monitoring our government seems to be headed towards.
I say the Government is not heading there… They are there and have been there some months after 911. How in god’s name can they prevent what happened in the above paragraph if they do not do these things…?
I’m OK with what the president is doing and so are most Americans… as long as they stay within the law. If they tap dance the line of almost going to far… that’s OK with me too, as long as we are at WAR and keep on the fine side of the line that is within our laws.
As far as the Vice President of the United States being one name that seems to figure in some of the Bush administration’s most controversial policies and actions… Come on Joe… It’s his JOB to help make policy!!!
I’ll end with this. I’m not saying you Joe… but I will say the MSM is again playing another angle to throw some mess out there and trying/WISHING for it to stick.
(The last Newsweek Poll was a BS Poll by the way. Look at how it was conducted and then let’s see if you post on it with confidence as you did in your earlier post.)
AubreyJ………
Cheney wants to keep the country safe. Al Qwesta and USA Today want to help the terrorists. It’s that simple.
Who cares about domestic surveillance? If you’re not a terrorist, this won’t affect you. Those who have nothing to hide have nothing to fear.
I can’t be as glib as Leonidas, but this NSA program – from everything I’ve read and the punditry on multiple sides – sounds pretty benign. Which makes the spying on international calls with known Al Qaeda figures almost laughable for the controversy it’s stoked – I think the buzzword “warrantless” is what makes ordinary surveillance on hostile agents sound so nefarious.
Actually, its controversial because the administration has gone around the FISA court which was set up by Congress to deal with this type of surveillance. Its because they ignored the law which requires them to get a warrant within 72 hours of the surveillance. Otherwise, it gives too much power to the executive branch.