Thursday, August 09, 2007
Son of FISA
Moving through today’s Washington Post Op-Eds:
Susan Landau of Sun Microsystems has a piece critical of Congress for “caving” into the Administration’s request for electronic surveillance rights without the FISA warrant. Ms. Landau worries that this 6 month extension could have long term ramifications that hurt our security because the technology needed to perform this function also makes us more vulnerable to outside hackers.
Perhaps; but adoption of many new technologies and lifestyles have usually left us more vulnerable precisely because of our increasing reliance on them. Left unsaid is exactly how getting a warrant would somehow improve our technological security. Because of this, while I don’t discount her fears for the POTENTIAL for mischief that such technology portends, I can’t help but be suspicious that her Op-Ed is primarily intended to be a partisan hit piece.
On a related subject, Robert Novak discusses Adm. Mike McConnell, Director of National Intelligence (DNI), and his role in the passage of this 6-month authorization.
“Late Saturday, the Democratic-controlled Congress passed a bill that is anathema to the party's base: authorization of eavesdropping on suspected terrorist conversations without a court warrant. It passed because Democrats could not take the political risk of going home for the August recess having shut down U.S. surveillance of threats to the country. But since they could not blame themselves, they blamed the nonpolitical DNI.” Admiral Scapegoat
Specifically:
“Rep. Jerrold Nadler of New York suggested McConnell accepted the Democratic restrictions "until he spoke to the White House, and now he changes politically." Off the House floor, one prominent Democrat said -- not for attribution -- that McConnell "was less than truthful." On the record, House Democratic Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel told me: "He was not negotiating in good faith."
And right after they question the Admiral’s integrity perhaps they should have righteously and preemptively harrumphed that he had better not question their patriotism. I suspect there will be similar character attacks on General Petraeus should his report next month on Iraq not be sufficiently doom & gloom to fit the Pelosi-Reid orthodoxy.
Susan Landau of Sun Microsystems has a piece critical of Congress for “caving” into the Administration’s request for electronic surveillance rights without the FISA warrant. Ms. Landau worries that this 6 month extension could have long term ramifications that hurt our security because the technology needed to perform this function also makes us more vulnerable to outside hackers.
Perhaps; but adoption of many new technologies and lifestyles have usually left us more vulnerable precisely because of our increasing reliance on them. Left unsaid is exactly how getting a warrant would somehow improve our technological security. Because of this, while I don’t discount her fears for the POTENTIAL for mischief that such technology portends, I can’t help but be suspicious that her Op-Ed is primarily intended to be a partisan hit piece.
On a related subject, Robert Novak discusses Adm. Mike McConnell, Director of National Intelligence (DNI), and his role in the passage of this 6-month authorization.
“Late Saturday, the Democratic-controlled Congress passed a bill that is anathema to the party's base: authorization of eavesdropping on suspected terrorist conversations without a court warrant. It passed because Democrats could not take the political risk of going home for the August recess having shut down U.S. surveillance of threats to the country. But since they could not blame themselves, they blamed the nonpolitical DNI.” Admiral Scapegoat
Specifically:
“Rep. Jerrold Nadler of New York suggested McConnell accepted the Democratic restrictions "until he spoke to the White House, and now he changes politically." Off the House floor, one prominent Democrat said -- not for attribution -- that McConnell "was less than truthful." On the record, House Democratic Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel told me: "He was not negotiating in good faith."
And right after they question the Admiral’s integrity perhaps they should have righteously and preemptively harrumphed that he had better not question their patriotism. I suspect there will be similar character attacks on General Petraeus should his report next month on Iraq not be sufficiently doom & gloom to fit the Pelosi-Reid orthodoxy.
Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home
<< Home
