16
Apr 09Don’t worry about the government.
Homeland Security’s recent memo about right-wing extremists got a bunch of conservative commentators up in arms–now that Cheney’s not behind the tape recorder, this surveillance state must surely be evil!
The inimitable Malkin declares,
[P]ast reports have always been very specific in identifying the exact groups, causes, and targets of domestic terrorism, i.e., the ALF, ELF, and Stop Huntingdon wackos who have engaged in physical harassment, arson, vandalism, and worse against pharmaceutical companies, farms, labs, and university researchers.
Right. (Though to be fair, she’s talking about the government.) Less than six months ago, she was “spotlight[ing] the silence of the left-wing privacy champions who care more about protecting suspected terrorists than Barack Obama’s critics.”
Glenn Greenwald’s response to this foolishness at Salon:
When you cheer on a Surveillance State, you have no grounds to complain when it turns its eyes on you. If you create a massive and wildly empowered domestic surveillance apparatus, it’s going to monitor and investigate domestic political activity. That’s its nature.
Although I fully share the disdain for those on the right who have only discovered their commitment to civil liberty, and I’d prefer intelligent opposition (like, say, the ACLU or EFF), I’ll take any opposition to government surveillance I can find.
Update: So will Thoreau. The Economist wonders, “Shouldn’t conservatives be reacting to this by… distancing themselves from the extremists?” (HT: Andrew Sullivan)
Update update: “Several intelligence officials, as well as lawyers briefed about the matter, said the N.S.A. had been engaged in “overcollection” of domestic communications of Americans. They described the practice as significant and systemic… And in one previously undisclosed episode, the N.S.A. tried to wiretap a member of Congress without a warrant, an intelligence official with direct knowledge of the matter said.” (NYTimes)
Tagged: civil liberty, news, politics