Is There Evidence That Warrantless Surveillance Is Producing Positive Results?
With President Bush pushing for making permanent the changes previously made to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) permitting warrantless surveillance, we are long overdue to ask an important question. How do we know that they're accomplishing what we're being told they're accomplishing? by Walt Thiessen
(libertarian)
Thursday, September 20, 2007
The Associated Press is reporting that President Bush, "wants Congress to expand and make permanent a law that temporarily gives the government more power to eavesdrop without warrants on suspected foreign terrorists."
This is the latest in a series of assaults by the President on the Bill of Rights. Much has been focused on the civil liberties aspect of the issue, and rightfully so. However, another aspect has been overlooked.
How do we know that warrantless searches are actually producing the results Bush claims they are producing? Actually, we don't know. The Bush administration has provided no real evidence to prove their case. Nor have the sponsors of the legislation in Congress. In fact, the key point as to whether warrantless searches are actually necessary in addressing terrorism has largely been conceded by opponents in Congress without a fight. Why?
The AP article quotes the president as saying:
"It will be harder to figure out what our enemies are doing to train, recruit and infiltrate operatives into America. Without these tools, our country will be much more vulnerable to attack."
But what is his evidence? He is further quoted as saying:
"The threat from al-Qaida is not going to expire in 135 days, so I call on Congress to make the Protect America Act permanent."
In other words, the president wants us to think that all we need to know about warrantless searches is that al-Qaida isn't going away. Nevermind whether the searches are actually producing results. Nevermind whether the Bill of Rights is being shredded. Nevermind that Bush has not defended his claims with substantiated facts. The president wants us to ignore all that and simply rely on one, steadfast belief: "We're from the government, and we're here to help you."
One of the reasons we have no hard evidence is that the Bush administration pleads "national security" whenever the question is raised. In other words, the evidence is secret. How convenient. That's the rub where the government is concerned. The people have no way to verify that (a) the program is producing the results Bush claimed it would produce, (b) the program is not actually violating the rights of any Americans, and (c) any gains made by investigative agencies using FISA would not have otherwise been obtained without the warrantless searches. This approach allows the administration to justify anything without having to prove a thing.
All this reminds me of a rather humorous article written by the late Harry Browne, two-time Libertarian Party nominee for President. The article was written on March 31, 2003, just one day after then Secretary of Defense Donald Rumseld was reported to have said, "We know where [the weapons of mass destruction] are. They’re in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat." It turned out, of course, that this was not true. The date was 12 days after the invasion of Iraq was launched, and one day before PFC Jessica Lynch was rescued. So clearly, Browne's article appeared right in the middle of the war, when popular opinion was totally and completely on the president's side.
Here's part of what Browne wrote:
"Remember our motto: 'We're from the government and we're here to help you.' Notice: Due to conflicts of interest, we've had to cancel: Operation American Freedom.
"We apologize that some of our previous epics ended tragically. Operation Vietnamese Freedom didn't live up to its advance billing. Operation Panamanian Freedom was scripted to end Panama as a drug conduit, but instead destroyed the Panamanian military — leaving no way to stop the flow of drugs. Operation Iraqi Freedom: the Prequel was intended to produce an Iraqi uprising and an end to the evil demon, but we changed the script at the last moment. Operation Kosovo Freedom ended the ethnic cleansing of Albanians, but mistakenly replaced it with the ethnic cleansing of Serbs. Operation Afghan Freedom enabled the Taliban to come to power. Operation Afghan Freedom II produced a lot of Rock & Roll and recycled veils, but it also left the country in the hands of feuding warlords and a U.S.-imposed viceroy who fears for his life. But we promise that you'll love Operation Iraqi Freedom. Unlike the last few productions, we guarantee to kill all the evil-doers — and even more!"
Browne received a lot of rather vehement criticism from the war's conservative supporters for this and other articles he wrote during that time period. But today, looking back from our historical vantage point in 2007, we can see that Browne was absolutely right about Operation Iraqi Freedom. Operation Iraqi Freedom was based on Bush administration lies. The American people were hoodwinked by the Bush administration. It was one more solid piece of evidence that the government, particularly the Bush administration, cannot be trusted.
Why then should we trust the president now when he claims that FISA must be made permanent because, "Without these tools, our country will be much more vulnerable to attack."??? The answer of course is that we shouldn't trust him. In fact, we should doubt Bush's sincerity completely.
Former FBI agent Mike German, author of the book, Thinking Like a Terrorist: Insights of a Former FBI Undercover Agent has been quoted by a Downsize DC email as saying, "The Bill of Rights is the perfect counter-terrorism strategy." The email further states:
German argues that requiring warrants for surveillance forces the government to FOCUS, and not waste time chasing phantoms.
This is something our legislators should bear in mind when they ask themselves whether FISA has served a useful role and whether the president and the national security teams that initiate warrantless searches are actually helping our country's cause or hurting it.
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 2
thumbs so far
The views expressed
in this article are those of Walt Thiessen only and
do not represent the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates.
Walt Thiessen is solely responsible for the contents
of this article and is not an employee or otherwise affiliated
with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
