A Truley Conservative Approach To Domestic Spying

Justin Oldham

A Truely Conservative Approach To Domestic Spying

Thu Feb 9, 2006 19:17

A Truely Conservative Approach To Domestic Spying

By Justin Oldham

U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez recently testified before a Senate committee on the issue of domestic surveillance. I watched his testimony. I was concerned by what I saw. Most of us have come to expect non-answers from government lawyers. That practice seems to be the normal thing in today’s highly charged political climate. Even so, I am left asking myself just one question. Why does the government want to avoid being accountable in this matter?

Liberals and Conservatives alike understand the need for a coordinated anti-terrorist program. The Constitution is quite clear about the role of the Federal government when it comes to providing for the national defense. A whole host of legal mechanisms stand ready to do the President’s bidding In the wake of 9/11, the Congress has granted more power to the Executive than at any other point in our history. On top of all this, countless opinion polls strongly support the enactment of anti-terrorist programs. With so much in their favor, why would a sitting President tell his Attorney General to run interference?

The keys to unraveling this conspiracy of good intentions can be found in two places. Inside the administration, lawyers and espionage operators are being asked to act under obsolete policies, procedures, and approving authorities. Technology has changed so much that today’s surveillance gurus have a lot of options that simply aren’t covered effectively by modern law. Outside of the administration, members of Congress are being asked to stay quiet about those intelligence options that are not yet regulated by modern law. They are tempted to leak sensitive information for partisan advantage.

There can be no doubt that the recent outing of the President’s “terrorist surveillance program” has seriously hampered anti-terror efforts. The truth is, we lost an important weapon in our fight. By acting without warrants, the President’s approved missions didn’t have to be fully reported to a hostile Senate intelligence committee. Somebody on that committee acted to tip off the media in the hopes of damaging the administration. Any political gain they might have harvested comes as the expense of our national safety.

If we’re going to avoid any more self-inflicted wounds like this one, we need to reconcile the law with our national security needs.

Congress should take the initiative to do the people’s business. We need to modernize the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which was created in 1978. While they’re busy with this, they can tackle the chore of creating or refining hundreds of badly needed legal definitions. Once they’ve don that, they can get busy with would may turn out to be thousands of new statutes that will have to be drafted from scratch

President Bush is playing by the rules he has been given. We can’t really blame him for making it up as he goes along when the law does not exist, or is not clear. Instead of leaking classified information for political advantage, Congress should get busy with the task of modernizing our espionage laws.

Politics & Patriotism: The Fisk Conspiracy Consultant

Justin Oldham
Author Shadow Fusion Enterprises
Box 282
104 Muldoon Road
Anchorage, Alaska
99504
Oldham@alaskalife.net
==================================

Bush Lets U.S. Spy on Callers Without Courts
http://www.apfn.org/APFN/BUSH_SPY.HTM

Mike Malloy re: Executive Power
http://www.apfn.net/audio/A001I06012822134001010.MP3

The Law
Frederick Bastiat's (1801 - 1850)
http://www.apfn.org/audio/thelaw.mp3

How to Identify Misinformation —usinfo.state.gov, Thu Feb 9 19:31

MOCKINGBIRD: The Subversion Of The Free Press —What Really Happened, Thu Feb 9 22:53

BUSH SAYS "TERROR*.*" 97 TIMES IN TODAYS SPEECH —RANDI, Thu Feb 9 23:13