Monday, December 19, 2005
Unclear on the Concept
I guess W. is still sending those alimony checks to reality.
His tirades about getting caught doing something illegal have been pathetic. Despite his repeated insistence that he was allowed to spy on Americans by an act of war, he's half wrong. Yes, warrantless wiretaps are authorized, provided a warrant is obtained within seventy-two hours of the tap being put in place. The warrants are provided by a secret court; it's not a public process -- so seeking the warrants will not reveal to anyone outside of a select few whom the targets of the wiretaps are. To follow the law would not have harmed "national security" or the "war on (some) terrorists" or any of the other shibboleths this Administration loves to toss around so freely.
Makes it seem like the real goal in not following the law and seeking warrants was to keep the identity of the targets secret from... well, everyone but W. and his inner circle. It makes me wonder whether the list of targets wasn't limited to people in America with known or suspected connections to al Qaeda, but may have included political opponents, the media, anybody placed on a no-fly list. We just don't know.
And it's pathetic that our President is stomping his little foot and complaining that the release of this information to the public is helping "the enemy". Is that why the New York Times held the story for a year?
Here's an interesting experiment. Take any post 9/11 speech by W., and replace the words "the enemy" or "evil doers" with "the Jews". Then ask yourself, "Hm. Who does that sound like?"
Moustache and screaming optional, although we're getting close to the latter the more self-righteous and obstinate W. becomes.
His tirades about getting caught doing something illegal have been pathetic. Despite his repeated insistence that he was allowed to spy on Americans by an act of war, he's half wrong. Yes, warrantless wiretaps are authorized, provided a warrant is obtained within seventy-two hours of the tap being put in place. The warrants are provided by a secret court; it's not a public process -- so seeking the warrants will not reveal to anyone outside of a select few whom the targets of the wiretaps are. To follow the law would not have harmed "national security" or the "war on (some) terrorists" or any of the other shibboleths this Administration loves to toss around so freely.
Makes it seem like the real goal in not following the law and seeking warrants was to keep the identity of the targets secret from... well, everyone but W. and his inner circle. It makes me wonder whether the list of targets wasn't limited to people in America with known or suspected connections to al Qaeda, but may have included political opponents, the media, anybody placed on a no-fly list. We just don't know.
And it's pathetic that our President is stomping his little foot and complaining that the release of this information to the public is helping "the enemy". Is that why the New York Times held the story for a year?
Here's an interesting experiment. Take any post 9/11 speech by W., and replace the words "the enemy" or "evil doers" with "the Jews". Then ask yourself, "Hm. Who does that sound like?"
Moustache and screaming optional, although we're getting close to the latter the more self-righteous and obstinate W. becomes.
Comments:
Post a Comment
