Thursday, October 18, 2007
On wiretapping, telecoms, and the FISA court
For those of you who cannot keep the machinations straight, Andy McCarthy's piece on the reported compromise between the Bush administration and the Senate Democrats over warrantless wiretapping is a great place to start. This bit, while obvious, is lost on (or at least discounted by) the ACLU and other organizations who are trying to run down the telecoms that have cooperated with the NSA.
It is not enough to say we can compel the telecoms to cooperate — that they can be (and are) required by law to assist the government by setting up wiretaps and the like. The simple fact is: The telecoms know the technology better than anyone else. If we are going to keep a step ahead of the people trying to kill us, the intelligence community needs the top experts in the tent helping us — help you can’t expect to get if you create a climate where they have to fear they will be sued for providing it.
The only explanation for the left's behavior on this question is that it simply does not believe that al Qaeda and other transnational jihadis represent a significant threat to Americans.
5 Comments:
By 
, at
Thu Oct 18, 08:43:00 PM:
Chris Dodd put a Senate hold on the bill today but reports via Congressional Quarterly say Reid will over ride the Hold in November to meet his gameplan
PS See HotAir blog for Rep Peter Stark jumping the shark today during the SCHIP debate not once but three times after being admonished by the chair the first time out
By 
SR, at
Fri Oct 19, 08:53:00 AM:
I'd really like to see our old friend Chambers weigh in on this. He'll probably say that jihadis are a threat, but that the US should fight them with one hand tied behind its back. Over to you CC.
By Cardinalpark, at
Fri Oct 19, 09:01:00 AM:
Actually, there is another explanation. They understand perfectly that the transnational jihadis are a threat to Americans -- and more importantly, a threat to the most powerful nation state in the world, the USA. This is where the extreme left has a unity of interest and philosophy with islamic jihadism -- its transnational philosophy.
By , at
Fri Oct 19, 09:48:00 AM:
This is the way business is done in a democracy, quid pro quo.
The Democrats know that GWB wants this to pass, and probably a majority of the Demos know it is a necessary evil (see the bombings in Paki yesterday marking Bhutto's return, was it Al Qaeda? Whatever).
But they leaders get to use the obstructionists to leverage the President to get something they want. Compromise in the halls of democracy. Don't watch it too closely, it may turn your stomach just a little bit.
It's what's for dinner.
-David
By , at
Fri Oct 19, 10:06:00 AM:
I would suggest a (slightly) more charitable interpretation--the democrats can't stand the thought of eliminating potential class action lawsuits that their trial lawyer masters could otherwise bring.
-Goody
