Malkin ping!
Please FReepmail me if you would like to be added to, or removed from, the Michelle Malkin ping list...
Posted on 12/20/2005 9:05:42 PM PST by smoothsailing
The Left's Privacy Hypocrites
By Michelle Malkin
December 21, 2005
Allow me to sum up the homeland security strategy of America's do-nothing brigade, led by the armchair generals at The New York Times and ACLU headquarters:
First, bar law enforcement at all levels from taking race, ethnicity, national origin and religion into account when assessing radical Islamic terror threats. (But continue to allow the use of those factors to ensure "diversity" in public-college admissions, contracting, and police- and fire-department hiring.)
Second, institute the "Eenie-meenie-miny-moe" random-search program at all subways, railways and bus stations.
Third, open the borders, sabotage all immigration enforcement efforts and scream "Racist" at any law-abiding American who protests.
Fourth, sue. Sue. Sue.
Fifth, yell "Connect the dots!" while rebuilding and strengthening the walls that prevent information-sharing between the CIA, State Department, Justice Department, the Department of Homeland Security and other key government agencies.
Sixth, hang the white flag and declare victory.
Seventh, sit back and wait to blame the president for failing to take aggressive, preventative measures when the next terrorist attack hits.
Repeat.
The hindsight hypocrisy of the civil-liberties absolutists never ceases to amaze. And their selective outrage over privacy violations never ceases to aggravate. Last Friday, The New York Times splashed classified information about the National Security Agency's surveillance of international communications between suspected al Qaeda operatives and their contacts all over the front page in a naked attempt to sabotage the Patriot Act. This Tuesday, the newspaper continued to stir fears of "spying on all innocent Americans" by recycling old ACLU complaints about FBI monitoring of radical environmental groups, antiwar activists and some Muslim leaders and groups.
Alarmists in the Beltway want investigations (though not of the leakers who fed the Times its story). The civil-liberties sky is falling, they say, and never have Americans been subjected to such invasive snooping.
Funny enough, another story about unprecedented domestic spying measures broke a week before the Times' stunt. But neither the Times nor the ACLU nor the Democratic Party leadership had a peep to say about the reported infringements on Americans' civil liberties. Sen. Charles Schumer (by the way, Chuck, how's that apology to Lt. Gov. Michael Steele over his stolen credit report coming along?) did not rush to the cameras to call the alleged privacy breach "shocking." Sen. Robert Byrd did not awake from his slumber to decry the adoption of "the thuggish practices of our enemies." The indignant New York Times editorial board did not call for heads to roll.
That's because the targets of the spy scandal that didn't make the front-page headlines were politically incorrect right-wing extremists.
According to the McCurtain Daily Gazette, in the days after the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing, the U.S. government used a spy satellite to gather intelligence on a white separatist compound in Oklahoma. The paper obtained a Secret Service log showing that on May 2, 1995, two weeks after the April 19 bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building that killed 168 people, the FBI was trying to locate suspects for questioning.
Investigators zeroed in on the compound in nearby Elohim City. "Satellite assets have been tasked to provide intelligence concerning the compound," the document said, according to the Gazette and Associate Press. The Gazette noted that "America's spy-satellite program is jointly under the control of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the Department of Defense (DoD). Targeting decisions are classified; however, persons familiar with the project say any domestic use of these satellites is barred by agreements between the CIA and DoD."
Photoreconnaissance satellites that gather intelligence from space usually target hostile governments and foreign terrorists. "The domestic use of a military satellite for domestic spying is a violation of DoD and CIA regulations regarding the proper use of top-secret national security satellites," the Gazette reported.
But with the exception of a brief Associated Press recap, the story received absolutely no mainstream-media attention. No civil-liberties circus. No White House press-corps pandemonium.
The left believes the government should do whatever it takes to fight terrorists -- but only when the terrorists look like Timothy McVeigh. If you're on the MCI Friends and Family plan of Osama bin Laden and Abu Zubaydah, you're home free.
------------
Michelle Malkin is author of the new book "Unhinged: Exposing Liberals Gone Wild." Her e-mail address is malkin@comcast.net.
COPYRIGHT 2005 CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.
--------------------
Note -- The opinions expressed in this column are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions, views, and/or philosophy of GOPUSA.
I want the government out of my paycheck. I am much more comfortable talking about my reading list, or my acquaintances than my personal finances. I think most people are.
AFTER Congress is done investigating Hillary's FBI files, then perhaps they can worry about wiretaps being done without a warrant.
Great line. Good post. You're doing some good work, ss. I didn't know you had it in you.
:)
Congresscritters are WAY TOO busy with trying to impeach Bush to worry about the Hildebeast.
Malkin hits the nail on the head as usual. It reminded me of a personal story involving 'satellite surveillance' from space. During CARTER's administration..our family farm was targeted by one of these 'new' big daddy contraptions. We had drained a few acres where the river had come up and flooded the crop land and never drained out 'naturally'. We drained it..and few months later we were slapped with a fine and threatened with a government lawsuit for 'draining it. During the lawsuit, we found out some big government agency(I was very young..so don't remember all the details) had friggin satellite photos of exactly how many acres we drained of 'wetlands'.
Moral of the story..Satellite surviellance is ok..as long as it is a liberal environmental wacko telling you what you can do with your own damn land..or if a Democrat is President!
Never grow tired..never grow weary..they will defeat the true patriots and defenders of this country if we do.
STAY STRONG!!
Please FReepmail me if you would like to be added to, or removed from, the Michelle Malkin ping list...
I'm lousy at posting them.:)
Yes, Mr. Smooth. I won't make that mistake again.
Sincerely,
Grasshopper.
:)
Great post, cgk.
"Sen. Charles Schumer (by the way, Chuck, how's that apology to Lt. Gov. Michael Steele over his stolen credit report coming along?) did not rush to the cameras to call the alleged privacy breach "shocking."
(Denny Crane: "I Don't Want To Socialize With A Pinko Liberal Democrat Commie.Say What You Like About Republicans. We Stick To Our Convictions. Even When We Know We're Dead Wrong.")
Like the FBI has the time and manpower to listen to my phone calls.
Oh yeah, 280 million Americans are in grave danger of having their privacy compromised.
Search "Echelon" here and read the threads from Clinton's days. Lots of people have done an about face on this sort of thing, and it ain't just the Left.
BTTT
The irony of the concern with the Patriot Act, especially by conservatives, is the fear of giving honest government the tools to fight crime and the war on terror because they don't won't dishonest government to have those tools. How is that different from liberals demanding "gun control" and our opposing it? How is that different from McCain demanding fair treatment of prisoners to insure that ours be treated well?
The truth is the bad guys, the Communists/Democrats, will do what they want regardless of the law. (Remember the Clintons? Was there a law they didn't break?) So will terrorists. So will street gangs and other assorted thugs.
All insist that we be purer than Caesar's wife while they remain free to do as they please. They all demand their "rights". As with many other things in our society, like our language, the left turns this upside down.
Laws and mores are to set society's rules and penalties are set to restrict and punish those who break them. In this case the left, typically, wants to punish the honest and reward those who would destroy us.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.