Return to the Free Liberal Homepage

« The “Neocon” Case | Main | Life After the Oil Crash 4 »

“Hell of a Threat”

From Reuters:

[Vice President Dick] Cheney, speaking to reporters during an overseas trip, defended the eavesdropping program as necessary to combat "a hell of a threat."
"And I don't think that there is anything improper or inappropriate in that and my guess is that the vast majority of the American people support that," he said.

I guess that this is where it all goes: “Trust us, we’re from the government.”

Cheney keeps fear mongering about the unspecified “threat.” While I had many quibbles with him, FDR had it right when he said: “There’s nothing to fear, except fear itself.”

Cheney speculates that the “majority” favor what can best be called “extraConstitutional,” warrantless searches of American citizens. (Aside: The word "warrantless" can, and possibly should, be read both ways. This is, after all, the very point of 4A.)

In a state of fear, if this unproven majority supports such things, it’s OK. This proves absolutely nothing. Majorities once favored slavery, too, was that OK? Were the Salem Witch Trials OK, too? Cheney may think his continually playing the fear card is his only option.

I find this all quite shameless and craven.

The other tack that Compound W and its apologists are putting out there is that previous presidents, including Democrats, have used the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) similarly, i.e. to spy on US citizens. Is this not most transparent? Is this not a classic case of when you are losing, change the subject? That Clinton and Carter used FISA may have some relevance in a partisan context, but it has nothing to do with the pursuit of truth. Employing a longstanding violation of 4A perhaps mitigates a bit, but one must employ some profound denial to suggest that 4A allows for warrantless wiretaps. 4A’s language is unqualified.

Our nation does have a challenge from al Qaeda. Whether it's a "hell of a" challenge seems overstated, but it does seem real enough. Let's address the challenge appropriately, within the bounds of the very freedoms we're seeking to defend.

-Robert Capozzi

Posted by Robert Capozzi on December 21, 2005 06:45 AM |

Free-for-all (frfr-ôl) -- n. A disorderly fight, argument, or competition in which everyone present participates.

from Dictionary.com



Advertisement
American Conservative Defense Alliance